[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: UF6
Radsafers,
I appreciate the attempt that some folks have made to bring civility to the group, but a lot of folks apparently still don't get it.
It ain't gonna happen.
If anyone knows of a group that is more academic and less attack oriented, please let me know. As I have said before, this type of forum has potential to help us all.
I suspect that some folks have chosen to unsubscribe to radsafe in a public manner on purpose in an attempt to make one last point. I have seen numerous instances where people were soundly criticized for doing so (even today). I will unsubscribe in the proper manner as to avoid further public scrutiny.
My parting thoughts only,
Charles R. (Bud) Yard Ph.D., M.P.H.
Oak Ridge, Tennessee
>>> <Jack_Earley@RL.GOV> 08/27/02 10:34AM >>>
Michael Stabin wrote:
<<Regarding the recent exchange, I think Ruth's comment was not meant to be
rude to Kurt, I thought she was just saying "this is not a huge safety
concern, why should we wring our hands about it?" (correct me if I'm wrong,
Ruth). The reply, accusing her of pomposity, was more of the kind that would
be considered by some for discipline, but which I decided to let go for the
moment.>>
Neither did I feel it was rude--I use the same phrase and I anticipate an
honest response. It's a reality check. There are rude and pompous responders
on this list--or at least there used to be--when I tired of reading their
comments I filtered them out and don't see them anymore. I've observed that
Ruth 1) doesn't need me or anyone else to defend her, 2) goes out of her way
to respond honestly and in great detail to comments most of us wouldn't even
acknowledge, 3) has more knowledge than most of us ever will, and offending
her will cost us, not her, and 4) has never been rude to anyone that I can
remember. I have no tolerance for rudeness from anybody, but there's also a
difference between rudeness and a strong response or even an implied or
explicit reproof where deserved.
Jack Earley
Radiological Engineer
-----Original Message-----
From: Richard F. Orthen [mailto:rorthen@EARTHSCIENCES.NET]
Sent: Monday, August 26, 2002 1:32 PM
To: Radsafe BBS; Kurt.R.Geber@grc.nasa.gov
Subject: Re: UF6
1. Why would anyone care?
Ruth Weiner, Ph. D.
Should start a new thread titled "Former Radsafe Subscribers" to keep track
of all the folks that are driven away by Ruth Weiner's inappropriate and
pompous replies to serious inquiries.
Rick Orthen
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
This message is for the designated recipient only and may contain
privileged or confidential information. If you have received it in error,
please notify the sender immediately and delete the original. Any other
use of the email by you is prohibited.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
************************************************************************
You are currently subscribed to the Radsafe mailing list. To unsubscribe,
send an e-mail to Majordomo@list.vanderbilt.edu Put the text "unsubscribe
radsafe" (no quote marks) in the body of the e-mail, with no subject line.
You can view the Radsafe archives at http://www.vanderbilt.edu/radsafe/
************************************************************************
You are currently subscribed to the Radsafe mailing list. To unsubscribe,
send an e-mail to Majordomo@list.vanderbilt.edu Put the text "unsubscribe
radsafe" (no quote marks) in the body of the e-mail, with no subject line.
You can view the Radsafe archives at http://www.vanderbilt.edu/radsafe/
************************************************************************
You are currently subscribed to the Radsafe mailing list. To unsubscribe,
send an e-mail to Majordomo@list.vanderbilt.edu Put the text "unsubscribe
radsafe" (no quote marks) in the body of the e-mail, with no subject line.
You can view the Radsafe archives at http://www.vanderbilt.edu/radsafe/