From: Damien Broderick (damienb@unimelb.edu.au)
Date: Mon Aug 18 2003 - 20:09:04 MDT
Just a quick point of personal explanation (for the record):
At 08:22 AM 8/18/03 -0700, Robert wrote:
>Damien was kind enough to point out to me
>several posts in which Mike was rather abrasive.
This might leave the impression that I agitated behind the scenes for
Mike's removal. On the contrary. In the OFFLIST email exchange Robert cites
above, I said this:
==================
[Robert:]
>Clearly in my discussions with Natasha currently
>there are different feelings with respect to when something is attacking
>ExI or her.
[DB:]
I assumed she was angered by Mike's outspoken attacks on her. That doesn't
seem at all the kind of reason for throwing someone off a list.
==================
Robert wrote:
>[Note: if you can identify a specific attack by Mike on Natasha
>(not an indirect attack) then I would like to see it as it might
>alter my perspective.
so I sent him several examples, headed with the comment:
>(I say nothing on whether or not I find them *justifiable* or *censorable*)
And of course I had already made my sentiment clear at the outset, when I
wrote of Mike's then-rumored expulsion:
>Seems extreme, if true.
Damien Broderick
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Aug 18 2003 - 20:18:52 MDT