If you'd like condescension or an example of how to talk down to someone, this is it.
I am doing this once, and once only, since I am not as convinced as you apparently seem to be, that it is in any way beneficial to clutter up the GA mailing list with messages that serve no useful purpose in relation to the issues that are supposed to be discussed therein.
Has it ever crossed any of your minds that I am not being condescending, but trying to get everyone involved - including you two (as more than sharpshooters from the sidelines)?
I cannot prevent people from drawing whatever inferences they will, although I did mean what I said about constructive criticism. It is unfortunate, and somewhat inexplicable, that you chose to interpret what I wrote to Prof. Froomkin as condescending, and to further use that as grounds to attack me personally. You have to go a long way to hurt my feelings - publicly implying that I'm any shade of jerk won't do it (2 ex-wives and their lawyers have made that clearer to me than you ever can!). So can we please lose the personal attacks, attempts to hurt feelings, and get down to working together?
E-mail is a very good medium and a wonderful tool for instantaneous communication, however there also is a tremendous potential for misunderstanding (which your messages illustrate very well). I would therefore remind you that there is still a thing called a telephone and in the future, if there is ever any doubt as to the tone of a letter, please pick up the damn phone and call the person. That way any necessary clarifications or explanations can be made in private, and destructive message threads such as this can be avoided.
If you really do have something constructive to say, either substantively or procedurally with respect to WG-A, the preliminary report, or any other matter of interest to the GA, I and everyone else in the GA looks forward to hearing from you. Otherwise, you need not respond to this message. I know I cannot prevent you from doing so, but enough time has been wasted on this exchange as it is.
P.S. For those of you who have been teeing off on Victoria Carrington, please understand that she is a junior lawyer assigned to me at our firm, as per normal firm procedure. Her work accordingly involves assisting me with my work, including the work that I do for the IPC, DNSO, NC etc. When she writes, it is almost always with my knowledge or consent, and frequently from direct dictation. She is merely doing her job and there is no reason to insult her for that. We would both appreciate it if you would have the courtesy to refrain from doing so in the future.
Subject: Re: [ga] General Comments on the agenda
Date: Tue, 13 Jul 1999 22:45:45 -0400
From: Michael Sondow <email@example.com>
To: Gordon Cook <firstname.lastname@example.org>
CC: email@example.com, "Dr. Victoria Carrington" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
References: 1 , 2
Gordon Cook wrote:
> Jesus! What a boatload of condescending crap!
You took the words right out of my mouth. It's astonishing. Jonathan
Cohen talking down to Michael froomkin! Incredible. But Dr.
Froomkin's been asking for it, playing these people's game.
> from mr cohen who
> really ought to be writing under his own account.
Is "Victoria Carrington" an alias for Jonathan Cohen? How sweet!
Group of Intellectual Property Practices
Facsimile: (613) 563-9231
This correspondence is intended for the person to whom it is addressed
and contains information that is confidential, and/or privileged to the
named recipient, and may be proprietary in nature. It is not to be used
by any other person and/or organization. If you have received this
e-mail in error, please notify us immediately by telephone (collect)
and/or return e-mail.