> Thanks for the quick and careful reply. After reading your note, I
> think everything was done correctly and with the right timing up to
> the point that Adrian indicated he was willing to continue. After
> that, it would have been a reasonable option to ask him if he was
> willing to extend for some months as necessary to let other things
> settle down before you launched the feedback period.
when one dos not acknowledge that there are serious underlying problems,
it is easiest to deflect and claim paper rituals [0].
when one does not perceive those underlying problems, the desire to
proceed overrides considerations of stability and stewardship. "we need
to make progress here."
> the timing is exquisitely unfortunate.
it is interesting to contrast this with the sensitivity being pushed as
tone policing in email.
the good news is that we can corporataize and destroy our instutions
politely.
randy
[0] - for an amazing, ans thankfully unrelated, exercise of this form of
denial, see mit and harvard dealing with the epstein issue.
