[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re[2]: Insulting postings on RADSAFE
The "High Plains Drifter wrote:
"In her writings to the NRC she puts names in context with her insults about
the NRC.... She is just saying what many feel and are afraid to say in
public. Seemingly never ending bureaucratic incompetence is hard to swallow
when you are paying thousands of dollars for it."
The most constructive way to point out things that need to be changed is to
be objective and focus on the actions and the results and not personnel.
Unless I am there, in NRC headquarters, and know the constraints and
pressures put upon the real people working in the organization, I find it
very hard to judge personal competency.
I have found that the best way to develop novel solutions to perplexing
problems is to bring different opinions to a table in a manner that no one
is put into a "foxhole" and forced to fend off direct or obtuse personal
attacks in a public forum.
We are at a point where the whole idea of radiation risk needs to be
reexamined. For the longest time we have been solely concerned with just
radiation risk and have dealt with it in isolation from all other risks.
This is becoming more and more impossible to do because we are increasing
overall risk. This point is being brought home to those of us dealing with
military health physics with crystal clarity. In many respects, this is
part of the problem we are currently facing with "radiation phobia."
This problem will require the open and direct interaction of all in this
community to solve. I am hoping that the interactions on radsafe will
foster this process.
These opinions are mine and mine alone.
Eric G. Daxon, PhD, CHP
edaxon@juno.com
************************************************************************
The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html