In article om,
wrote:

The context was your ridiculous claim that (quote) ``an e-ticket is not
a written contract,'' followed by a long blovation that any opinion
of yours about e-tickets must be correct because you are a Licensed
Attorney (TM)... even though it was blindingly clear that you knew
bugger-all about e-tickets and how they work. E-tickets were written
contracts back in 2000, and they still are.

You haven't a clue, have you? Spend some time on google and then see
what you have to say, both about "Brooklyn Academy of Law," where I
practice law, what position I hold and whether I am a "once-a-year
traveler to Las Vegas.

According to Google, you have a degree from a fourth-rate law school
(Brooklyn^H^H^H^HLoyola Academy of Law or something - doesn't seem
to appear among the top fifty US law schools, per US News rankings)
and hold a position as ``counsel'' (isn't that a shorthand for failed
lawyers who didn't make partner?) at a third-rate firm. Apparently,
law is not the first career at which you failed, which would explain
why you imagine that a law degree is a license to spout nonsense
about e-tickets.

E-tickets are not written contracts if there is no writing, and there
is no writing when they are booked by phone. You do know the
definition of "writing," don't you?

I do know that no so long ago you claimed that (quote) ``an e-ticket
is an oral promise.'' Apparently, all these annual joints to Vegas
still haven't taught you that e-tickets come in forms other than oral
promises by airline representatives. Tsk, tsk.

By the way, where is your law degree from? Where are you authorized
to practice law?

I don't need a law degree to steer you - ever gently and kindly -
towards realizing that your claims about e-tickets (``an e-ticket
is an oral promise'' and ``an e-ticket is not a written contract'')
are pure nonsense. But if you don't believe me, why don't you stomp
your little feet at IATA and tell *them* what you think about legality
of e-tickets.