Re: Rules of Engagement?

[dski@cameonet.cameo.com.tw (Dan Strychalski)]

  Charles Mueller wrote --
  
  >         Fuel has been added to the fire, though, when list members jump in
  > and say, 'Now boys, tut, tut,' piously blaming the victim as well as his
  > attacker.  This typically happens on a list, of course, as a result of fear,
  > a reluctance to criticize a bully who has shown his willingness to verbally
  > abuse any who oppose his views.
  
  To review:
  
  CM: Members of Congress, unless I've been misled, don't allow their
      incoming mail to be trashed d.o.a., dead on arrival....
  DM: This is, of course, nothing but a fantasy.
  CM: How do you know it's a "fantasy"?
  DM: Because I know the way the Hill works. / Guess you were "misled," huh?
  CM: I don't think so.  If I recall, there was considerable discussion here
      earlier about you being the 'journalist' from Microsoft....
  
  Mr. Mueller:
  
  I've checked it all and found no such discussion. Kendall Clark said Mr.
  McCullagh's comments on the conference "seemed fair and fairly insightful."
  I find the reports that Mr. McCullagh has written for other media and cc'd
  to the list reasonably evenhanded (perhaps even increasingly so), while I
  am disgusted at the pro-MS bias -- sometimes overt, sometimes subtle -- in
  much of what I see on the CNN and ABC Web sites and in the NYT piece quoted
  here. I can't remember agreeing with anything Mr. McCullagh has written for
  this list as a private member of this list, but that doesn't make him an
  M'soft flack (and it's hard to take him seriously after Glenn Livezey got
  through with him; love ya, Doc). So that was unjustified in my view.
  
  And I don't think you're a fool, a loon, or a wacko, so that was
  unjustified in my view.
  
  So I said so. And if that was done out of fear, then I remain,
  
  Piously yours,
  
  Dan "King Tut" Strychalski