| |
In lugnet.admin.general, Kevin L. Clague wrote:
| |
In lugnet.admin.general, Larry Pieniazek wrote:
| |
In lugnet.admin.general, Leonard Hoffman wrote:
| |
In lugnet.admin.general, Ross Crawford wrote:
| |
In lugnet.admin.general, Larry Pieniazek wrote:
| |
In lugnet.admin.general, Ross Crawford wrote:
| |
I think it does. If there was total trust, we wouldn’t require a policy
document.
|
And THAT’S the crux of why LUGNET is at least partly broken. The admins
don’t trust (some of) the users and (some of) the users (not necessarily
the same ones) don’t trust the admins.
|
OK let me put it another way, if it’s worth creating a P&P doc, it’s worth
assuring the users they will be listened to.
|
Yeah, I don’t believe this. The LPRV is a great example. The Admins
gathered a group of people and said, we trust you guys! We want to know
what you think! And then, seemingly out of nowhere, they started accusing
the Admins of creating a rubber stamp committee.
If you don’t trust me, then no matter HOW many times I say “I want to
listen” - you will always think I’m lying to you.. or being sarcastic or
whatever. I’ve seen it happen quite a few times.
This is an excellent
example - Scott accuses me of being insincere when I was trying to
reassure. What then?
|
Well, as long as it was Scott, it was easy enough to disregard. It was just
Scott, after all, noted button pusher.
But when we get this mistrust from people we used to respect before they
wigged out, or people we still do want to respect for their contributions,
despite their personal attacks, that’s more serious, isn’t it?
|
Is saying someone wigged out a personal attack? Is it beaving to a different
standard? DOesn’t sound like you are unpholdin’ to you own rules. You
commiteed to do better.
|
Well, Lenny, Larry and I have had some conversations, especially when the LPRV
was first formed, and he acknowledged that he felt that Admins should be held to
a higher standard hat on, or hat off. So Larry beleives there should be a double
standard. He gave a solumn promise then, and I beleive hes trying his bes to
uphold that promise now.
Not everthing I try to say is to “push” buttons, and I’m not trying to use
something from a private email to beat him up with.
Larry questioned my integrity on a few points, and I’ll say it again, he was
right. I’ve tried to point out my mistakes for all to see, and correct them
when I can. Larry did me a favor questioning my integrity, and I’ve done what I
can to rectify the situation, including defending Larry in this forum by stating
that the “abusive email” charge was wrong. My emotions got the better of me.
I’m human.
You may not believe me, but I’d like to get to a positive resolution on this
topic. I’m not on a witch hunt, I’m trying to be heard. If I felt heard why
would I keep talking? I can think of a hundred things I’d rather do that debate
this stuff.
Larry, if you took my statements above as button pushing, it was not mean as
such, I was returning the favor you did me when you rightfully questioned my
integrity.
This has been a pretty tough situation for Larry, but so far I would give him
pretty high marks for his efforts at living to a higher standard.
Kevin
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
45 Messages in This Thread:
 
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
