On 11/29/07, jayjg jayjg99@gmail.com wrote:
On Nov 29, 2007 12:26 PM, Charlotte Webb charlottethewebb@gmail.com wrote:
On 11/28/07, SlimVirgin slimvirgin@gmail.com wrote:
As others have pointed out, the five editors she discussed it with may not even realize themselves who they are, because Durova may have mistaken no objections for positive feedback -- or she may have thought that feedback about her case study was the same as feedback about a block. So the implication that there are five editors
somewhere
in hiding, letting Durova face the music alone, misses the point that they may have said X, but Durova heard Y. There is therefore no point in conducting a witchhunt.
For once, Slim, I hope one of your explanations is correct. Of course
nobody will really know for sure unless they have a generally accurate idea as to what, if anything, was actually said.
Actually, you do know for sure. Matt said it, Guy said it, Slim said it, and I'm sure they all "have a generally accurate idea as to what, if anything, was actually said."
On Nov 29, 2007 1:37 PM, G MZ solebaciato@googlemail.com wrote: Durova said quite clearly on wikipedia that the response from the 5 ranged from possitive to entheusiastic.
Yes, but what exactly were they responding to, and where? This point has been made multiple times, it's discouraging to have to continually repeat it.