>>92256179Actually you mentioned "cross-examinating the grades", as retarded as that is, being helpful after saying a statement is "proof enough".
Not only is that not the correct phrase its also completely different that my assertion that what you find as being "helpful" is actually all that matters.
>What about when Professor Dickbag...The when should be an if but:
They'd still have to prove he said it. You seem to think anyones word is taken just because they give testimony. A witness can say they watched a person kill someone and it isn't "proof". You still need to prove they did.
Now, because this would be a civil case, not criminal, the burden of proof is actually lower. But it still remains. Which is why any lawyer would tell you to settle for a full refund.
>Patently wrong. Some colleges literally record the classes themselves.MIT and Harvard posting a few lectures is them posting content that was both cleared by the professor and by the university. Also, the act of recording being agreed upon by one party does not invite the recording from all parties.
>recordings are NOT blanketedly allowedYou said classes can be recorded. You never specified the extent of the allowance. as such you made a blanket statement. So yes, you did claim they were allowed.
