Mail*Link(r) SMTP               RE>...a comment

Celia, I respectfully disagree with your analysis of this issue as one not
worth "wasting any more bandwidth on".  While I'm sure the person who sent the
message is horribly embarrassed by now, it seems to me that the issue is
crucial to the success of this list.  If we're afraid to ask questions for
fear of being ridiculed there soon won't be any questions asked. The messages
I've been reading seem to focus on ensuring that this one thoughtless comment
doesn't deter any of us from asking a question with confidence that it will be
kindly received.

For many of us these messages arrive with a full description of where the
message originates and has been routed.  There's no anonymity with office
email and mistakes like this one are a good reminder not to get too sloppy.

Speed and ease of communication do not excuse bad manners. It serves us well
to remember the intended reader, and perhaps a few unintended ones, when
composing messages on-line. Your conjecture that the person's qualifications
to chair a committee may have been what was being discussed does little to aid
your argument.  Are you suggesting that a public discussion (world-wide in
fact) of someone's personal credentials in such an off-hand manner would be
appropriate? I don't remember anyone making an accusation that the message was
necessarily 'derogatory'.  'Inappropriate' and 'tacky' I do remember.

Alexandra Thompson
Grants Office, Armstrong Atlantic State University
xxxxxx@mailgate.armstrong.edu

--------------------------------------
Date: 4/8/97 6:03 PM
From: Research Administration Discus
At the risk of wasting any more bandwidth on a message that was obviously not
for public consumption, could I just comment that there is another
interpretation.  There was nothing derogatory said.  If, for example, opinions
were being gathered whether this person were experienced enough to chair a
professional organization's nominating committee -- that could be a fair
assessment of someone with more limited experience than the sender.  I think
it is inaccurate to conclude that the comments were pejorative.    E-mail,
with its telegraph style, sending errors, reduced editing, the human distance
evoked, affords ample opportunity to practice grace with our colleagues!

Celia Walker   [xxxxxx@vines.colostate.edu]
Director, Regulatory Compliance
Colorado State University
970/491-1563     FAX:  970/491-1958