response 28 of 53:

Dec 8 01:39 UTC 2003

I disagree with Mary on this one.  Dan did the most rational thing he could
with the information he had at the time.  he did ask how to handle it; he did
do what other staff members had done in the same situation.  

To hold him publically to a different standard even after you know other staff
members advised him differently than you would have done it, is not rational.
Rational is to say, ok, I didn't know staff was doing it this way, let's talk
about how _staff_ handles these kinds of situations, not how _cross_ handled
this one.  

And I still dont think he was _wrong_.  He did it differently than you would
have liked.  That does not make it wrong.  That does not make it "admit you
were wrong and apologize".  

I think he did the _right_ thing.  with what he knew at the time.  To say,
you should have known that I would disagree with staff behavior does not make
what he did wrong.  

For jumping to conclusions about an account, he owes that account an apology.
But not a global 'mea culpa'.