Posted by Ron Hill on June 20, 2005, at 14:40:31
In reply to Re: reconsideration, posted by Dr. Bob on June 18, 2005, at 13:18:48
> > You are being asked to reconsider the length of the block because, as Dinah has said, he misunderstood the application of the DNP rule.
>
> Right, I didn't mean to oversimplify, and I understand the above may be another factor. I'm working on sorting it out. Thanks for your patience,
>
> Bob
------------
Dr. Bob,Thank you for taking time to reconsider. In trying to sort it out, please take time to scan through the April Fool's Day thread which starts here:
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/social/20050330/msgs/478484.html
Then compare the circumstances surrounding the original DNP request in the April Fool's Day thread to the posted PB guidelines which set forth the criteria under which a DNP can be issued. The PB DNP guidelines are posted here:
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/faq.html#harassed
I respectfully add my voice to the throng of PB participants asking you to reduce the duration of this block given the unusual and extenuating circumstances. Clearly, there are substantial amounts of gray in this one and, as such, it does not fall into the same category as the more commonplace type of block.
Thanks.
-- Ron
poster:Ron Hill
thread:511407
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20050614/msgs/516056.html