Re: Watch out

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
• Next message: Ruby Rohrlich: "Re: Iroquois and the Constitution -Reply"
• Previous message: Michael Cahill: "Re: Relevance?"

Yes you did misinterpret my message. And to get an answer to your
questions ask the person who initially used the term "watchdog" in his
message, obviously used to bait. I did n ot say it was a sexist term;
somebody else said that, but I did object to its application to me, and
so would you, if it were applied to you. Ruby Rohrlich

On Thu, 8 Feb 1996, hjmartin wrote:

>
>
> >Peter: My post of today indicates as much. It's interesting that the man
> >who used the "watchdog" notion did not turn his watchfulness to the
> >people who need watching. Ruby Rohrlich
> >
> >On Wed, 7 Feb 1996, Peter D. Junger wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> I must jump in.
>
> Exactly who, Ruby, needs to be watched? Exactly why do they need to be
> watched? After we watch, to whom do we report? What should we include in
> our reports?
>
> I do not think that I mis-interpreted Ruby's message but sincerely hope that
> I did.
>
> JMartin
>

• Next message: Ruby Rohrlich: "Re: Iroquois and the Constitution -Reply"
• Previous message: Michael Cahill: "Re: Relevance?"