Subj : Re: Routelist keeper
To   : Janis Kracht
From : Robert Couture
Date : Mon Apr 23 2001 04:25 pm

Hello Janis!

23 Apr 01 21:35, you wrote to Dave Hamilton:

 JK|> You are welcome to have your own opinion Dave.  I suggest you
 JK|> reread my original message if you cannnot ascertain my feelings in
 JK|> this particular situation. I also suggest you stay on topic in this
 JK|> echo. If you are not posting a routelist entry or querying about
 JK|> one, I suspect you have no business to share here.

Why is it that when questioned or annoyed, this always seems to be the result. 
It seems that you are saying "I don't like what you are saying, so I suggest 
you shut up."

Something seems somehow "wrong" with that statement.  We have a right to have 
the job done correctly and without malice.  Foxy has done neither, yet it looks 
like you slapped Foxy on the wrist and sent her home.

What I would like to know, is, has Foxy previously tampered with things before?

I have a right to know these things.  If we see that us lowly sysops are being 
harmed by those in power, then those in power should be held accountable. This 
includes you.  If Foxy has prior infractions, then she should be removed. If 
she has not, then, as you have done, she should be warned.  But this latest r13 
issue looks like it could be a second infraction.

Foxy should be made accountable for these actions and should be made to answer 
to *us* about why things happened.  When evidence exists that creates the 
belief that what Foxy did was anything *but* a configuration error, then Foxy 
needs to answer.

I will await the answer from Foxy :)

Robert

--- GoldED+/W32 1.1.5-0416
 * Origin: RuneKeep - telnet://runekeep.darktech.org (1:229/2000)

.