Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

Return to index: [Subject] [Thread] [Date] [Author]

RE: Ban The "I" Word (Re: Incompetent Plan Checker)

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
I wasn't reading this post because the subject line suggested that it was
the other "I" word: Inappropriate.

Any time a topic changes to a personal attack it is off-topic and
inappropriate.  In a debate, one who makes a personal attack instead of a
counter point would have lost the debate.

Lighten up.  Stay focused.


-----Original Message-----
From: Daryl Richardson [mailto:h.d.richardson(--nospam--at)shaw.ca]
Sent: Monday, March 07, 2005 4:48 PM
To: seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org
Subject: Re: Ban The "I" Word (Re: Incompetent Plan Checker)


Bill,

        I hope you don't leave, Bill.  I for one generally enjoy your
postings.

Regards,

H. Daryl Richardson


----- Original Message -----
From: "Bill Polhemus" <bill(--nospam--at)polhemus.cc>
To: <seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org>
Sent: Monday, March 07, 2005 5:13 PM
Subject: Ban The "I" Word (Re: Incompetent Plan Checker)


> Dennis S. Wish, PE wrote:
>
>> You really are a piece of cake - I'm not sure where the anger comes from,
>> but since you asked, here are my personal opinions, of your e-mail
>> replies; You are not dense, just stubborn and obstinate - you prove this
>> by such dripping sarcasm. You obviously understand implied language and
>> should understand decent behavior among your peers. You are not Autistic
>> which would cover those who take language literally rather than
>> understanding implied language rules. Don't push me on this one issue
>> because I am an expert on Autistic behavior as well as those with Downs
>> Syndrome. You don't fit the mold of either and that makes you simply
>> cantankerous and obstinate.
>
> Dennis, it's very simple.
>
> I do not believe that it is "ethical behavior" to use a term like
> "incompetent" in reference to anyone else on this list. Disagreeing with
> someone's opinion is not a problem--though I wish that it were based on
> something less "passionate" than simply politics, as unfortunately happens
> all too often.
>
> But the word "incompetent" has grave implications, even on a public forum.
> I have stated here how I had to learn--the hard way--how your words on
> forums like this can come back to haunt you in a legal setting, for
> example. Can you imagine how an unscrupulous attorney might use such a
> quote to his advantage in a courtroom?
>
> I admit: I cannot get over how appalled I was that this word was used with
> regard to me, without that person knowing a single thing about any of the
> facts being discussed, and yet no one else seem to think it was a big
> deal. Again, it's one thing to disagree with someone's opinion concerning
> any of the issues we discuss, but when you use a term so fraught with
> negative implications as that... Well, I'm not "that kind of guy," but I
> shouldn't wonder if it were not actionable. I know at least one instance
> of a P.E. here in Texas who had his license suspended for using
> inflammatory language in a letter regarding another engineer's competence.
>
> So I repeat: How is it that such a repugnant act as that is "acceptable,"
> but it is NOT acceptable to bring up the fact of its repugnance? I
> seriously want to know the answer to that.
>
> I do apologize if it rankles; I have the annoying habit of not letting go
> of things I feel are out of line. That's not to say "holding a grudge." It
> IS to say "this is unjust under any circumstance, and I can't just drop
> it."
>
> But no one thought it worth even so small a thing as an apology, or even
> an acknowledgement that it was a very WRONG thing to do.
>
> Between the two of us, I think it far better if _I_ am the one who leaves.
> My opinion seems to be in the minority regarding this topic, after all.
> And majority certainly rules.
>
>
> ******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
> *   Read list FAQ at: http://www.seaint.org/list_FAQ.asp
> * *   This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers *   Association
> of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To *   subscribe (no fee) or
> UnSubscribe, please go to:
> *
> *   http://www.seaint.org/sealist1.asp
> *
> *   Questions to seaint-ad(--nospam--at)seaint.org. Remember, any email you *   send to
> the list is public domain and may be re-posted *   without your
> permission. Make sure you visit our web *   site at: http://www.seaint.org
> ******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********



******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
*   Read list FAQ at: http://www.seaint.org/list_FAQ.asp
*
*   This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers
*   Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To
*   subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
*
*   http://www.seaint.org/sealist1.asp
*
*   Questions to seaint-ad(--nospam--at)seaint.org. Remember, any email you
*   send to the list is public domain and may be re-posted
*   without your permission. Make sure you visit our web
*   site at: http://www.seaint.org
******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********


******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
*   Read list FAQ at: http://www.seaint.org/list_FAQ.asp
* 
*   This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers 
*   Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To 
*   subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
*
*   http://www.seaint.org/sealist1.asp
*
*   Questions to seaint-ad(--nospam--at)seaint.org. Remember, any email you 
*   send to the list is public domain and may be re-posted 
*   without your permission. Make sure you visit our web 
*   site at: http://www.seaint.org 
******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********