XPost: alt.comp.os.windows-10, alt.comp.os.windows-11   
   From: janicekoziol@nie.ma.spamu.prosze.com   
      
   W Fri, 26 Apr 2024 04:15:00 +0000, Judge Porter napisal:   
      
   > While living next to his neighbor, Jennifer Everett, for the last few   
   > years, Rick Conners has been using her wifi without her knowledge. After   
   > Ms. Everett protected her wifi access with a password, Mr. Conners has   
   > been demanding that she return his access to her internet. After denying   
   > his request, Mr. Conners decided to sue her and claims that since he is   
   > subjected to her loud music, he should be allowed to access her wifi   
   > because after all, the signal much like the music bleeds through the   
   > walls and into his residence.   
   >   
   > https://youtu.be/0LMEL6_b15o?si=Nar2iGKyXpm4Zf8V   
      
   So I made the mistake of watching it. From start to finish.   
   Two people were at their respective podiums.   
      
   A girl, perhaps the plaintiff and a man, the likely defendant.   
      
   There was a judge. But no jury. No lawyers. No court clerk.   
   But there was a court guard of sorts. And maybe even spectators.   
      
   But what was it?   
      
   The judge ruled in the lady's favor and against the man which surprises   
   nobody but then the judge issued a "restraining order" against the man.   
      
   Huh?   
      
   A restraining order is a legally binding enforced boundary, is it not?   
   The court doesn't seem to be a legal court but more of a reality show.   
      
   How can that restraining order possibly be legally binding?   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)