Posted by Gremlin [12.255.181.7 - 12-255-181-7.client.attbi.com] on 26 September 2002 at 13.38.00 ZuluTime:

In Reply to: One Step forward, two steps back posted by wolfeman_psycho on 26 September 2002 at 11.34.56 ZuluTime:

Actually, this was the result of an SoD. And, while another appeal is still possible, it's messy now since it's a double-or-nothing game.
     Technically speaking, appealling the first time was risky. But the risk there was losing the ten percent Hunter already had. Living anywhere but Haiti, a hundred bucks a month isn't really enough to worry about losing in favour of thirty-six thousand a year.
     The question now is whether it's worth losing twelve thousand a year to get the thirty-six.
     Although: there might be a better way to do this. Instead of appealing the case itself, we could just launch a new suit over the damages not yet covered. The seventy percent is meant to justify nothing more than a major-depressive disorder; the physical damages--which have been proved to be both real and caused by the army--are still open. The fact that Hunter can barely sign a cheque with the nerve damage in her wrists warrants a hundred percent on its own; and that hasn't really been addressed yet.
     Of course, addressing that can't result in 170% >:)
     But, if we can get them to settle on that issue, it'll add anything from another ten percent to a maximum of thirty to the established case. Which would triple the award with approximately zero chance of losing what she's already got. It's probably the best option.

Of course, the big money comes from the army's incompetence, not their settlement. The situation has become dumb enough--to enough people--that it's going to be a large part of Duhmerica whenever I get finished writing it. Which is a matter of knowing the enemy's job--and the laws they claim to uphold but break daily--better than they do.
     And that starts today. Particularly after seeing a largish sign at the DoT last night claiming that [despite the federal law produced by the Privacy Act of 1974] you're 'legally required' to furnish proof of your Social Security Number to get a licence in Colorado.
     No more games. These imbeciles are getting hurt now.