In article >,
"The Ranger" > wrote:

> We'll agree to disagree regarding this unfounded accusation on the
> potential for litigary abuses. There are /so/ many other ways to find
> out if someone is flimflamming the system that pulling raw data, then
> sifting through it, and hoping that it's even remotely accurate is
> unnecessary.

This is a non sequitur. Pointing out a potential use is not an
accusation. How can a hypothetical be an accusation? (let alone an
unfounded one)