Posted by Dr. Bob on June 2, 2010, at 18:52:03
In reply to Re: being blocked again » Dr. Bob, posted by floatingbridge on June 1, 2010, at 22:07:00
> Dr. Bob, I know you don't consider silence to be a sufficient response to your request for rephrasing. Would an apology to either the other party or to you or to an unspecified universe in general be sufficient?
>
> I'm not sure it's entirely clear to those unfamiliar with Admin that there is an imperative embedded in your requests.
>
> DinahSorry about not being more clear. If bulldog rephrases or apologizes, he can avoid being blocked again. If others show him how or encourage him, they may help him avoid being blocked again.
But I wouldn't call that an imperative. He doesn't have to rephrase or apologize, and others don't have to show him how or encourage him.
> The subject line does confuse me.
>
> "Re:" implies there was an original subject line. Was there and I missed it?
>
> "again" seems unnecessary and potentially punative and/or patronizing.
>
> floatingbridgeBlocking him could itself be seen as unnecessary, punitive, and/or patronizing. Would anyone besides Dinah like to try to keep that from happening?
Bob
"a brilliant and reticent Web mastermind" -- The New York Times
poster:Dr. Bob
thread:949565
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20100321/msgs/949816.html