[Linux-aus] Photos at conferences

[Peter Lawler]

Dear Chris,
First off, I myself must apologise for taking so long to reply to your 
public apology.

I wanted to let myself be calm and measured as I read it, rather than 
remaining as upset as the thread direction had made me. I was just 
starting to decide what I'd say when the delay was extended by a near 
two week hospitalisation and recovery due to a 'very very very bad' case 
of appendicitis.

Whilst the first delay was within my control, the second wasn't. 
Further, after I was permitted to go home I did not wish to read your 
email until I was off all my hospital prescribed pain medication. That 
day was late last week. I finally got to properly read your mail on 
Saturday.

I accept your apology and do believe you have learned that when in a 
position of some responsibility one may have less leeway to be flippant 
in public with references to genocide and persecution.

I wish you the best for your continued role in Linux Australia as well 
as for your future career.

Regards,


Peter Lawler.


On 22/01/14 20:08, Chris Neugebauer wrote:
> I had considered posting a longer response to Peter's message, but I
> feel that anything more would be sticking my foot in my mouth any more
> than I had. I include an original message sent to Peter below,
> verbatim.
>
> I repeat my sincerest apologies to Peter for replying directly to him,
> and for inappropriately using his words against him in that context. I
> also apologise for over-reach in attempting to shut down the thread.
> I'm sorry, and I've learned from this.
>
> Finally, I repeat my offer of working with any member on this list in
> tabling any recommendations on a photography policy for conferences.
> This was offered without malice: I offer it sincerely, I did not
> intend for it to be construed as further attempts to silence the list.
>
> --Chris
>
> On 22 January 2014 16:47, Chris Neugebauer <chrisjrn at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 22 January 2014 16:25, Peter Lawler <linux-aus at bleeter.id.au> wrote:
>>> I'm not sure how an unlikely event is can be known to be impossible. But I
>>> bet there's some crazy maths out there where one can prove said unlikely
>>> event has already transpired and won't ever happen again.
>>>
>>> It certainly sounds as if you feel you've got enough out of the thread to at
>>> least bang together a proposal. In which case I fail to see how your two
>>> 'stfu' posts, the 'me too' replies and your justification of your two 'stfu'
>>> posts are not precisely the thing you're complaining about.
>>>
>>> That one of those 'stfu' was a reply to a post that afacit was the first to
>>> mention the key legal phrase 'duty of care' (albeit 'implied', but it was
>>> still bolded) makes your glib suggestion that everything had already been
>>> said in the thread somewhat dubious.
>> Sincerest apologies firstly for replying directly to you in the second
>> of my 'stfu's. It was in no way directed at you directly. It was a bad
>> message to directly reply to, and I should have considered context
>> better.
>>
>> I'll also admit that I over-reached a bit. For that I apologise. I
>> hope I've learned from it.
>>
>> In the interests of transparency, I'll be posting that to the list
>> later on, once I've formulated a response to the rest of that post --
>> I think there's an important point to be made here. But I figure it's
>> important I get the apology to you sooner rather than later.
>>
>> --Chris
>>
>> --
>> --Christopher Neugebauer
>>
>> Jabber: chrisjrn at gmail.com -- IRC: chrisjrn on irc.freenode.net --
>> AIM: chrisjrn157 -- WWW: http://chris.neugebauer.id.au --
>> Twitter/Identi.ca: @chrisjrn
>
>