Thank you.
Professor, this the second March in a row we've had you back here as a witness. The last time we had you in here, the government fell. We're hoping we can have a different outcome after you've been here. I don't hold you personally responsible for that, by the way; in fact, I thought the testimony you gave last time regarding the costing of bills was very good. Of course, as you know, I approached you afterward, and I have since passed that on to other people. I thought it was very sound testimony during what were, frankly, a set of histrionic hearings, so it was much appreciated.
I wanted to get into the dividing line between offensive and threatening. That is a question that is not, I think, dependent upon the kind of technology used. Once we've dealt with that, perhaps we'll have time to talk a little bit about how technology and the use of the Internet may cause something to be different in nature, perhaps, than it was when done in a pre-Internet paper world.
With regard to the question of what is merely offensive and what is threatening, do you have any additional thoughts as to where one draws the line and how one establishes where something becomes threatening?