Wrong madam, ignoring is *not* answering. But you can try again.

And like I mentioned before, you express your annoyance in this case, and directed it at the woman right organizations. When you were confronted on that logic, you discharged the organizations and went for the court system, thus fulfilling your right to back off.

As for the kiss, according to the account in the court ruling: he held her head suddenly, and kissed her. She backed off and looked stunned. He still asked her twice for her number. If he wanted to get it, he would have gotten it, and would have apologized accordingly.

In our case, there is no law against answering you, though it's not much of an intellectual challenge.

No idea what you're on about, but have a good one.