I would be only too happy to
get into the discussion further... but thus far it is you who has engaged in the «rhetoric masquerading as reasoned debate».
Not exact matches
It's a nifty interview trick other leader's might want to emulate, but it's
far from the only question that can effectively
get you beyond a
discussion of skills and impact and
into the murkier (but possibly even more essential) realm of character.
I do not recall
getting into an argument with her, and I do not recall any
further discussions.
But the blog itself, so
far, seems to be a bit more than shameless self - promotion, actually
getting into some
discussion about how to define what are «market» or «standard» provisions or terms in agreements, and the benefits of «hierarchical modularity» in building and maintaining repositories of templates.
We should go
farther in
discussions of the rationale for the existence of corporate criminal liability, but that's a different issue and not one which I intend to
get into, here.