Re: RFC Series Editor Resignation

[Benjamin Kaduk <[e-mail]>]

Hi Mike,

On Sat, Jun 29, 2019 at 06:23:22PM -0400, Michael StJohns wrote:
> Hi -
> 
> I'm going to top post because replying to this line by line isn't really 
> the best way to dispose of this part of the thread.  And as someone 

Agreed.  I will just make a few key points (and reorder slightly for my
convenience).  FWIW, my stance on the goal of "dispos[ing] of this part of
the thread" is not to come to agreement on the definition of "stupidity",
since that's off-topic for this list; I will try to limit myself to trying
to explain why, with my Sergeant-at-Arms hat, I continue to believe it is
not appropriate.

> noted, if I remained silent it might be taken as implicit approval of 
> what I consider a unsupportable take on "stupidity" as described below.
[...]
> To finish up - I appreciate that the Sargent at Arms has to walk a fine 
> line here, but I don't think this is even close.  Again, I'd appreciate 
> it if in the future we follow the general contract and first have 
> private conversations.   You'll  have plenty of time afterward to make 
> your explicit disapproval clear if necessary.

In this case, we felt a public statement was necessary, precisely because
you decided to use the word after a (presumed) careful deliberation and
thought it was still appropriate, and used it in the same sentence as "the
question of malign intent".  Situations and objects do not have "intent";
individuals (and perhaps groups) do.  To speak of "stupidity" as the result
of something with intent seems really hard to separate from the perceived
"stupidity" of the intended action leading to that result, i.e., the action
taken by the individual or group.  I do not think that's appropriate
professional conduct for this forum, and am compelled to publicly dispute
the stance that such conduct is a valid result of a careful consideration
of how to say something.

> Also I'd really appreciate it if you don't attribute a particular 
> emotion to my persistence with this set of discussions - it's yet 
> another form of demeaning behavior. You attributed "frustration", and 
> another I* attributed "upset" to me.  What I actually am is "sad" at the 
> state of affairs and "disappointed" in the various folk that caused this 
> stupidity to occur somewhat including myself.  Feel free to use either 
> of those words in future correspondence.

My apologies.  (Perhaps I was projecting my own frustration onto you, since
our responses to the situation seemed otherwise similar.)  I'll try to keep
that in mind.

-Ben