# Let's all Pit septimus!

**URL:** <https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-all-pit-septimus/567017>\
**Category:** The BBQ Pit\
**Created:** [January 9, 2011, 8:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-all-pit-septimus/567017 "2011-01-09T20:47:03Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![septimus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/septimus/32/410_2.png) [@septimus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/septimus)\
**Post date:** [January 9, 2011, 8:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-all-pit-septimus/567017/1 "2011-01-09T20:47:03Z")

</div>

I started a [thread in GD about “tort reform”](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=592336), proposing in particular that medical malpractice litigation be eliminated entirely. The first response startled me: eliminating such litigation and malpractice awards entirely led to “only [one] difference between your proposal and the current system …”

As I complained in another recent BBQ Pit thread, Dopers respond to my posts without reading them for comprehension. (And this happened again in that very BBQ Pit thread. :smack: ) I hope objective Dopers (if such exist) will peruse at least the first two posts in the above-linked thread and tell me if my OP was ambiguous and whether it appears **Richard Parker** read OP for comprehension. (I’m not asking here whether my proposal is sound, nor whether Mr. Parker is a world-renowned expert on medical malpractice. I’m simply asking whether he appears to have read OP in that thread for comprehension.)

The thread went downhill from there:

> [@Liberals should support tort reform](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberals-should-support-tort-reform/566979/10):
>
> Your entire post is ill-informed drivel.

---

_[View the full topic](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-all-pit-septimus/567017)._