rick at linuxmafia.com
Fri Jan 25 05:56:34 PST 2008
Quoting Edward Cherlin (echerlin at gmail.com):
> I thought that I was making a simple statement of fact, one which you
> confirmed to me over the phone later on. You don't regard me as
> interim president. End of story.
Why are you still digging, at the bottom of that hole? I was saying the
_way_ you posted this avoidably and inaccurately suggested I was somehow
> > (I know you've more recently retroactively attempted to un-say what you
> > posted earlier today, but that unfortunately has left some inaccurate
> > impressions on the membership, which you seem to want me to ignore, even
> > though they were at my personal expense. In a word: No.)
> I have no idea which statements you're talking about, but I deny the
> imputation of bad faith.
Back up. Read. Parse.
I said nothing about "bad faith". In fact, my assumption is that you
were merely careless.
> I did not unsay anything.
Was it, then, some _other_ Edward Cherlin (echerlin at gmail.com) who said
"I abandon all claims to be acting/interim President,
and retract all orders/suggestions that I made about system and
mailing list administration"? Because that's all I meant.
> I have not asked you to ignore anything, nor did I wish you to ignore
So, was it a _different_ Ed Cherlin who asked me and an entire group of
volunteers by telephone this past evening to please ignore posts we
might see about election matters, shortly before I came home and saw
a post from _you_ making an inaccurate and rather unflattering claim
about me by name?
> What did you want me to do instead?
To repeat: If you're making claims about me by name in public, I
> I said no such thing, nor did I mean to imply it.
I will gladly accept that the implication was accidental. In fact,
that was my assumption.
> You are reading much more into my words than was there--a statement of
Ironically, this is what _you_ are now doing.
> > o I replied that I would happily comply, _but_ that I would gladly
> > do the same for any SVLUG member -- including Alvin and Bruce, the
> > other (so far) declared candidates.
> But not at that time, as far as I was aware.
I will gladly accept that you had not bothered to read their postings to
> More bad faith, is it? I deny it.
For my part, I do and did not assert it. (I didn't say you _set out_ to
put me in an ethical bind, merely that you did that. Dunno about you,
but in my universe, "I didn't mean the consequences of my actions"
doesn't buy you much after childhood.)
> > And, by the way, _thank you_, Alvin, for your response to Ed on this
> > point. Exactly, sir. I couldn't have put it better.
> You mean this nonsense?
Exactly that nonsense. I suggest you re-read it, since Alvin was lucid
and spot-on, for once.
(I showed it to Deirdre, and she was amazed and impressed.)
More information about the svlug