It was nothing but an expression of my belief that Chris' excuses for his inappropriate behaviour were wholly inadequate.
This is not an isolated incident; it is a pattern of behaviour, and excuses do not cut it. Anything less than a wholesale acceptance of inappropriateness, retraction, and commitment not to repeat this kind of behaviour in future is insufficient. Unlike you, I have no power, only words to express my disappointment in you both. On 6 November 2016 at 17:26, Jim Jagielski <j...@jagunet.com> wrote: > If this is your attempt to accept Chris' explanation, even if > you don't agree with it, then you have not quite succeeded. > > If instead, this is your attempt to continue to heap fuel on > a fire, and be just as aggressive as you paint others to be, then > you have done quite well. > > I don't expect that others will be spending their time replying > to your messages anymore, at least on list. > > > On Nov 6, 2016, at 11:19 AM, Benedict Elliott Smith <bened...@apache.org> > wrote: > > > > In summary: you claim to be someone with years of experience at the > forefront of an organisation that conducts all of its business primarily > over email. In that time you have not learned to express yourself over > email in a manner that is not incendiary to those reading it, nor offensive > to the intended recipient. > > > > That sounds to me like you are openly disclaiming your suitability for > the position of responsibility you currently hold. > > > >
