> On 10/01/2022 3:12 AM EDT lloydwood@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <lloydwood@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > oh, I could deal with Harkins. But the point is, no-one should have to deal with Harkins. > Sorry I'm late to this party but after reading each of these "problematic emails", I could not find any evidence of racism[1]. Can someone please tell me which person was attacked and what their race was? Anyone who is actually upset about the "problematic emails" is either to weak for a leadership position or has an underlying agenda. One of Dan's "problematic emails" is really spot on[2] and any reasonable person would agree with him. I think when you say "problematic emails" you really mean "problematic for us" and everyone needs to agree to that so we sent out this last call. In other words, problematic means Dan is a free thinker and we can't cope. I see no reason for Dan to be booted of the lists and no reason for this Action. I have not read the deleted drafts but I would like to, so if someone could send me a copy or a pointer, that would be great. I could read them while I'm at the pub sipping on a black and tan. (see what I did there?) I said I'll be having balck and tan. balck and tan. balck and tan. balck and tan. cancel tim balck and tan. [1] Definition I used is from Oxfords https://www.google.com/search?q=racism&rlz=1CAKVPC_enUS859&oq=racis&aqs=chrome.0.69i59j69i57j0i131i433i512l5j0i131i433j0i433i512j0i131i433.2616j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8 [2] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/terminology/X6OF0MBKAzyLhYaAfAxS6srXRNw/
