SUO: Re: En*Topic :> ECORD :> Email :> Complaint
o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o
E*T :>
ECORD :>
Email :> Complaint 03. <JA, 04 Dec 2003, 01>
o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o
In: E*T :> ECORD.
http://suo.ieee.org/email/thrd6.html#11856
Re: E*T :> ECORD :> Email :> Complaint 02.
http://suo.ieee.org/email/msg11976.html
Matthew,
Suppose we view the interpersonal criticism/complaint situation,
plus the task of designing a policy to address it, along the same
lines as the quality management objective, together with the task
of formulating a strategy to achieve it. To the extent that these
two problems turn out to be analogous, then, we might get an extra
helping at the macro-level for anything that we are able to solve
at the micro-level, and maybe vice versa, if it's easier that way.
I didn't really think this out ahead of time, but it looks like
I'll be alternating between bottom-up and top-down approaches,
so maybe we can call this "both ends against the middle" or
"burning the candle at both ends". I started out last time
with some concrete material for analysis, started out this
time with an abstract formal analogy, so now let's return
to the material world, and chunk up the matter into more
digestible pieces, sentence by sentence.
MP, to JA:
MP: I unsubscribed from the SUO list because the volume and
pointlessness, to my mind, of your email was driving me
to utter distraction.
MP: A brief perusal of your "analysis" of Matthew's procedure
document and your "Page Left Intentionally Blank" thread
did little to reassure me that it was safe to return.
MP: There was a time when simply filtering your mail to trash was
effective, but now almost all messages on the list are from you
or are responses to you made by well-meaning individuals such as
Matthew West and John Sowa;
MP: I would beg them to stop engaging you in dialogue until you've
learned to respect polite (and insistent) requests concerning
your list behaviour.
MP: I plan to return to the list as soon as you're
removed or you demonstrate some respect for the
other list members, including, and perhaps in
particular, the Chair.
MP: If you disagree with Jim S. about policies and how you should
be dealt with, then perhaps you should run for his position.
MP: Now that you've driven away so many of
your detractors, you may even have a shot.
MP: If you win, I promise to abandon the SUO forever.
MP: I'm frustrated because the SUO work is important and
of great interest to me and I would like to participate.
MP: I'm also frustrated because there are a number of smart people who
no longer participate in the SUO process solely because of your
behaviour and I fear it may be too late to salvage the project.
MP: It irks me that you blithely ignore the wishes of so many people and
happily proceed to undermine what had once been a very promising and
exciting project and a place of important and intelligent discussion
and turned it into what has essentially become a weblog about and for
a single petulant individual.
MP, to JS:
MP: Regarding your questions in http://suo.ieee.org/email/msg11860.html
I fully support restricting Jon Awbrey from posting to the SUO list.
MP: Further, I don't think you are obligated in engaging him in
any further discussion on this matter. You have been patient,
too patient, and have been subjected to what appear to me to be
paranoid delusional rants about conspiracies and public attacks
on your character in return. Reasoned discussion can proceed
only when both parties are reasonable. The time for more
significant disciplinary was reached some time ago.
Yikes, past midnight, so I'll count this as numero uno
for tomorrow, and start fresh from here in the morning.
Jon Awbrey
P.S. Please be so considerate as to let me know if you guys
have retreated to some kind of secret caucus on these issues,
as I shouldn't want to waste any more of my precious tickets
on stuff that'll be rolled out and over us, willwe nillwe.
o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o