|
In Reply to: Why I stoop to name-calling/But Stand for Truth posted by Skidrow on August 26, 2005 at 19:26:50:
Now that someone else has spilled the beans about Chancellor's unpublished June email to Jules, I feel free to make another observation about Chancellor. The people at MO who are asking why Jules got so upset at Chancellor's relatively innocuous August email should think about the character of a woman much deserving of their respect.
Jules receives hundreds of emails every week from all sorts of people that none of us would ever like to hear from. She's absolutely ferocious about confidentiality. As MO webmistress, she has a demonstrated the ability to patiently suffer fools for over four years. She isn't quick to play hardball, which is unusual considering all the crap that gets thrown at her.
"Chancellor writes an icky email to Jules under the cover of darkness, when exposed, he apologises." (Exer Out/Freedom In)
Chancellor's behavior has been that of a bully. That is why her therapist suggested filing a complaint with his academic dean. Bullies are almost as common in college classrooms as they are on elementary school playgrounds.
If Jules had not exposed Chancellor's hand by publishing the August email, I have little doubt that he would have continued to harrass her privately with "unctious, condescending, accusatory emails" written on behalf of Borowik.
