On 2020-01-16 11:00, Trey Harris wrote:
On Thu, Jan 16, 2020 at 12:19 ToddAndMargo via perl6-users
<perl6-users@perl.org <mailto:perl6-users@perl.org>> wrote:
As far as the Dog remark, I have told you and others
ENDLESSLY what that meant. That you continue to
deliberately misrepresent me on this is a moral
issue on your part.
The issue is not, now, just the dog remark—if you and JJ agree that it
was a previously-established in-joke,
Hi Trey,
That was not a "previously-established in-joke", that was a
description of being over protective.
that /could be/ water under the
bridge—though again, the issue of a lack of perspective here appears to
be why you’re not understanding why it continues to be brought up: most
readers will not be aware of such an in-joke, and will be (perhaps
erroneously) offended on behalf of JJ if you don’t explain it /at the time/.
No; the issue is your ongoing response to being called out for the
remark. Your histrionic reactions, such as “Oh Great And Mighty
Gatekeeper of the Documentation!”
That one WAS A JOKE. It was gentle teasing and meant
with affection.
and your apparent misapprehension that
merely explaining away a statement that some took offense to, without
any outward sign of contrition, inoculates you from any further offense.
Contrition if I do something wrong first. Offense can not
be given, only taken. Some folks take offense out of anything.
After endless explaining what I meant, those still taking
offense AFTER the explanation are the ones that need to
be apologizing.
The thing about /true/ contrition (and I haven’t read anything from you
on this that seems to amount even to lip-service of contrition) is that
you have to put up with a certain amount of what you may perceive as
sour grapes before complaining about it. You can welcome magnanimity,
but you can’t demand it. And until you do show true contrition, the
timer on when those grapes sour can’t even start.
“What, I already apologized, won’t you just drop it?!” would already be
a bad look; “I have told you and others ENDLESSLY [that my behavior
wasn’t something I ever needed to apologize for in the first place]” is
quite a bit worse.
My, my is not the sky a pretty shade of blue today?
Trey
—
(p.s.: I don’t know your gender identity,
I am an XY
but it reads to me like you’re
overtly mansplaining here. But other than calling you out on it, I’m not
going to go any farther into that particular minefield on a public list.
Feel free to disagree but don’t bother doing so in a list reply: I won’t
encourage such behavior by even reading it, so I’m going to assume any
reply you make to this email is just responding to the remarks before
this postscript. If you feel you really must respond to this, you can
email me privately if you like, and I promise I’ll read it and reply. If
I’m making an incorrect assumption about your gender identity—the “I
have told you” remark is still enormously patronizing, even if it isn’t
mansplaining.)
You know, if I wanted to, I could take offense to the above, but I do
believe you mean well, so I won't.
