Re: Stupid users (was the "top this" thread)

[David Neeley <dbneeley -at- oddpost -dot- com>]

Your interpretation of the case is fully consistent with the law of torts, which is that governing topics such as this. 
  
I think it is not practically correct to think that "...she was prepared for discomfort if she spilled"--as a practical matter, people rarely think of such things consciously. However, the legal standard calls for what a reasonable person under the circumstances should have assumed--and this is very much consistent with that standard. 
  
Still, to do it as she did *was* stupid regardless of any theoretical or actual assumed risk. 
  
David  
  
-----Original Message from Rebecca -dot- Flickinger -at- libertysite -dot- com----- 
  
I believe the issue is not stupidity, but assumed risk. 
  
The user assumed a risk in placing hot coffee between her legs. Her 
assumption of the risk was probably that she might get superficial burns - 
ones that her lap could likely withstand if the liquid is truly fit for 
human consumption. That being the assumed risk, she was probably prepared 
for discomfort if she spilled. Had she assumed the risk was eight weeks in 
burn therapy, she might have behaved differently. 

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

NEED TO PUBLISH YOUR FRAMEMAKER CONTENT ONLINE?

RoboHelp for FrameMaker is a NEW online publishing tool for FrameMaker that
lets you easily single-source content to online Help, intranet, and Web.
The interface is designed for FrameMaker users, so there is little or no
learning curve and no macro language required! Call 800-718-4407 for
competitive pricing or view a live demo at: http://www.ehelp.com/techwr-l3

---
You are currently subscribed to techwr-l as:
archive -at- raycomm -dot- com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-techwr-l-obscured -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com
Send administrative questions to ejray -at- raycomm -dot- com -dot-  Visit
http://www.raycomm.com/techwhirl/ for more resources and info.