Maybe PJ would have been worthy of a post! It seems it might have generated some interesting discussion ...
Shy person who shuns interviews and avoids reporters, or not a real person at all ... no good article, but this has come up before.
I'm without a strong opinion either way, myself.
PJ responds to e-mails, with a potent sense of ethics (chastises people for pulling petty stunts for their own ends). On the other hand, reporters have had a heck of a time trying to get interviews.
Best guess? Shy paralegal-trained person with ethics? Probably.
It'll be interesting to see if SCO can find her to serve her with a subpoena, but I hope they don't. I've been dealing with a different tech court case for a year now in which I have to give depositions about once every three months, and it is annoying as all hell.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
branchandroot
PJ
Date: 2007-02-15 10:26 pm (UTC)Re: PJ
Date: 2007-02-16 12:51 pm (UTC)Shy person who shuns interviews and avoids reporters, or not a real person at all ... no good article, but this has come up before.
I'm without a strong opinion either way, myself.
PJ responds to e-mails, with a potent sense of ethics (chastises people for pulling petty stunts for their own ends). On the other hand, reporters have had a heck of a time trying to get interviews.
Best guess? Shy paralegal-trained person with ethics? Probably.
It'll be interesting to see if SCO can find her to serve her with a subpoena, but I hope they don't. I've been dealing with a different tech court case for a year now in which I have to give depositions about once every three months, and it is annoying as all hell.