Posted by Lou Pilder on March 25, 2007, at 10:20:48
In reply to Re: Lou's reply » Lou Pilder, posted by Dinah on March 25, 2007, at 8:04:09
Dinah,
In response to the TOS here that it is fine to discuss the actions {we} take, and to discuss policy here and to have rationales posted by asking for them, I feel that your post to me here in this thread is an action by {we} since it is signed by you as a deputy acting for Dr. Hsiung.
In looking at the grammatical structure of your post to me, you write that the statement in question that you cite in the first statement in your post to me here connected to the following:
[...seems similar to the statement he requested that you use the notification button about...] Then you write,[...I would strongly suggest that you follow his request about...]. Is this not an administrative {action}?
Since you cited as your foundation for your post to me a spacific statement, I am unsure as to why you posted it again with the grammatical strcture including,[...{unless} you get clarification from him (Dr. Hsiung) differently...{you follow} his request...].
The generally accepted meaning of {unless} could also have the same meaning as {but}, and I am unsure as to what you are meaning in your post to me here for one possible meaning IMO that I have the potential IMO that am lead to believe is that since you also wrote,[...I think it is a good idea to review the following post by Dr. (Hsiung)...] that the grammatical structure of {review} and the phrase {a good idea} could have IMO various interpretations and one as being an administrative action. One of the the generally accepted meanings of {review} is that it could mean IMO that you want me to {inspect} the previous post that you cited that was from before Dr. Hsiung posted what you cited to me here. But since it was posted before Dr. Hsiung's statement to me, I am unsure as to why there is the {good idea} to {inspect} since it was already posted before Dr. Hsiung's statement to me here.
I am unsure now as to what is happening here for I am trying to abide by the rules here in particular to the TOS here that provides a means to discuss the actions of the administration and the policy and that if one wants to know the rationale for something to just ask here.
in your statement, [...the statement above seems similar to the statement he requested that you use the notificatoin button...] that statement that you cited is from before he posted to me about statement {similar} to such. And since it was posted before that, I do not understand exactly why you posted to me here about that.
Your statement to me here that includes,[...you follow his request...] has me feeling unsure as to what your post to me is about. For have I not followed his request? I am unsure as to the grammatical structure that I have an understanding of as to what the {following} is to mean or not in that the post that you cited to me.
In your statement ot me, [...it might be a good idea to review (what DR. Hsiung wrote to you yesterday)...], could there be more than one way in your opinion, that someone could feel when they read a statement like that directed to them by a member of the administration? Could there in your opinion be more than one way that the statement could be interpreted when it is directed to them by a member of the administration?
Lou
poster:Lou Pilder
thread:735406
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20070304/msgs/744101.html