Re: ending the conflict
Luis Nadeau (email@example.com)
Sun, 07 Jun 1998 18:16:16 -0400
At 2:55 PM -0600 98/06/07, Richard Sullivan wrote:
>>The only part that is silly is that you assume you know everything about
>>the conflict. What you saw on this list was a fraction of what took place.
>>This is typical of people who watch a "documentary" on television (or
>>worse, a 30-second segment) and then consider themselves "experts" in a
>>position to make a judgment.
>This confirms what I have said and have been challenged on in the past;
>this whole affair is a *private* squabble and mostly has nothing to do with
>the list. It is therefore uncalled for to ban Terry from the list for
>*private* indiscretions. If there is any *hidden* meaning to all of this,
>it really doesn't concern the list. Any personal differences outside of our
>community should not have a bearing on Terry's participation here!
>Luis has admitted -- at least that is my interpretation -- that this affair
>is based on events offlist.
Absolutely not. What have you been smoking Dick? This whole affair is based
on Terry's unacceptable behavior ON this list. This is what triggered a
chain of event mostly ON this list. What you don't know about, for
instance, is that Terry did a fantastic job at burning the bridges behind
him on his way out. That was offlist.
>I think in fairness we need to assess whether
>or not offlist, manners, personal squabbles, professional jealousies, or
>just plain loutishness is a criteria for banning someone from the list.
>I have to admit I don't have a clue as to what all the hullabaloo is all
Dick, your message made that perfectly clear but thanks for confirming it
Some of us do have a clue and we don't want to see him back here.
On the other hand, this is a free world and I strongly encourage you,
pardon, I CHALLENGE YOU and Terry to start your own list.
Fredericton, New Brunswick, Canada