(smile) I think I know you well enough to recognize venting vs. advice... besides, I get myself into trouble that way arguably more often still, as you've alluded, so I'm hardly going to throw stones. Living in a Glass house, especially...
Thanks for clearing up the source of your ire, I had been mystified by the response proportional to the original post. I would be happy to meet offline and discuss the previous weeks, and you could then be as snarky as you felt like ;^).
Here's how it looks from my perspective...
That's pretty close, not surprising given your insightfulness. My proceeding without cross-checking... I have always operated on the basis that I could run with unproven facts or assertions as long as they didn't obligate anyone else to anything. But what you seem to be saying is that I'm sort of negatively-obligating others, when they hadn't asked for it.
Try OTHER methods of communication, if one fails.
Good point... ultimately, hopeforyou saw the above post and called me. I had actually tried IMs to a couple of people... and I have no phone numbers for any of the Observatory folks, none for anyone other than your cell and the main House Dreamland number. I have no idea how to contact Laura, similarly. That local group may be incredibly interconnected internally, but I'm barely connnected to it... (I won't use "we" here, myself ;) So in some sense, this LJ post was another method of communication, one where I could hope that someone in that group might see it and then contact me in a comment or by other means.
Re: Mea Culpa, and apologies for the tone (part 1)
(smile) I think I know you well enough to recognize venting vs. advice... besides, I get myself into trouble that way arguably more often still, as you've alluded, so I'm hardly going to throw stones. Living in a Glass house, especially...
Thanks for clearing up the source of your ire, I had been mystified by the response proportional to the original post. I would be happy to meet offline and discuss the previous weeks, and you could then be as snarky as you felt like ;^).
Here's how it looks from my perspective...
That's pretty close, not surprising given your insightfulness. My proceeding without cross-checking... I have always operated on the basis that I could run with unproven facts or assertions as long as they didn't obligate anyone else to anything. But what you seem to be saying is that I'm sort of negatively-obligating others, when they hadn't asked for it.
Try OTHER methods of communication, if one fails.
Good point... ultimately,