At 09:33 AM 14/01/02 -0600, John wrote:
>I'm removing both parties from the list immediately.
G'day John,
I don't want to stir up a hornet's nest, but it seems clear to me from the
addresses shown on Ian Sinclair's quote that the offending message was not
sent to the The Sinclair family discussion list (sinclair@quarterman.org),
but direct. I therefore can find no justification for your action to
disbar anyone from this list.
If a direct e-mail offends someone, methinks they should take it up with
the offending party in a similar manner, i.e.; _directly_.
This is in no interpretation a voicing of support for the language used,
but it was obviously never the intention of the writer that I should view
that particular e-mail in the first place, nor indeed the bulk of this list.
I must say also that given the fact that the message was "Cc'd" to our
chief seems to suggest to me that the writer has a dramatically different
viewpoint on language usage than perhaps does the receiver - and that is
their own particular perogatives, surely - in a _private_ e-mail exchange?
Just my opinion of course, but I would like to see your decision reversed
if possible!
Cheers from upsidedown land,
Ian Newman
Perth, Western Australia
> ----- Original Message -----
>From: "Sinclair" <labehotierre@wanadoo.fr>
>To: <iansinclair@nosshead.freeserve.co.uk>
>Cc: "Malcolm Caithness" <chief@clansinclair.org>
>Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2002 4:04 PM
>Subject: Re: Teamwork ?
[ This is the Sinclair family discussion list, sinclair@quarterman.org
[ To get off or on the list, see http://sinclair.quarterman.org/list.html