On Jan 30, 11:11pm, Lucy Skjelstad wrote:
> Subject: Re: RE[2]: History...was Atomic (Apology)
 
>     David and Joshua:  You came down too hard on Hank for commenting on
>     Bryan's hard-to-read lack of paragraphing.  I, for one, appreciated it.
>     It's hard enough to get through all these messages (and I like to read
>     most of them), so the least all of us can do is try to make our
>     postings as reader friendly as possible.
 
However, Hank could have been more "professional."  He did not have to ask
what schools Bryan went to, and did not even know the reasons behind Bryan
message style...maybe Bryan had a bad day! Maybe he did not want everyone to
read his message! Maybe he doesn't want to be friendly...like Hank?
 
>           So how about 'you guys' being a little more patient with us
>     'guys' who are (believe it or not) trying to help.  (And plaudits to
>     Bryan who knows how to handle constructive criticism.)  He gets a hand.
 
The only reason Bryan "handled constructive criticism" is probably because he
was so embaresses by Mr Hank's insult. A red face goes a long way to
accepting degradation!
 
I do appreciate the professional tone of your message.  As for Hank's: I do
not criticize unless I feel someone else is being attacked unfairly, namely
Bryan.
 
 
--
Joshua Heuman
[log in to unmask]
Art History Undergraduate