March 14th, 2011 08:18 pm (UTC)
Re: which are?
That's the thing of it. If I had permission to republish the conversation in question I'd have no need to write the blog post at all.
So because the person who decided to respond to a public blog comment via private email (unsolicited private email I might add) won't give me permission to publish the conversation I have to make a choice.
I can either leak information against their wishes and have them claim I am acting in bad faith or I can refrain from publishing the conversation in question...even as I watch them to continue to selectively misrepresent private email conversations..an activity the person in question would call a bad faith action if I followed their own pattern of behaviour.
And even telling people that I received an email from this person was construed as bad faith as I have come to find out. I did not expect that. So the small effort I did make to use the information I had been given was considered a bad faith action.
What is even weirder is that the conversation I'm referring to is not the first private email conversation with the person in question. I have in the past been put in the same situation where the very same person took a conversation private and I requested permission to republish the full email exchange for accountability reasons. In the previous email exchange the person agreed and I have the full (but brief) email conversation published in my people.fedoraproject.org web space.
Now I would have thought that the first conversation would have set a precedent for our email interactions and would have set a standard of expected behaviour. I commented on a blog, the person sends me an email response to the blog.. I requested to be able to republish the full email exchange..and this time my request was denied. I've been nothing but forthright in my desire to limit private discourse for accountability reasons. And the other person seems to be intent on having a discussion entirely devoid of accountability.