Reg,
Thank you for your post. We are in agreement on the substance of what you said. Certainly, well-intentioned people can see the same set of facts and speculate differently as to the business outcomes. And certainly, the facts in this case are not at issue: a big fish swallowed a little fish. The ensuring debate is good for all of us.
But your comment caused me to reread my post. You re-taught me the old lesson: the road to hell is paved with the best of intentions. By using the words “truly hurtful comments”, I was specifically trying to avoid a direct in-your-face personal confrontation with another Buzzer. In consequence, my post reads as overly broad, attacking anyone who disagrees with my business assessment. That’s wrong, and wasn't my intention. I screwed up.
What specifically set me off was the use of the words “filthy lucre” and “barf” to refer to Luke’s deal. Absolutely outrageous. This jumps way over the line of analyzing a business decision and instead directly attacks a man’s character. In all the years you’ve known Luke Dunlevy, what has he ever done to deserve treatment like that? And I can’t think of anything more hurtful than having your life’s work referred to in those terms. Simply unacceptable.
I’m sorry, but manners are manners.
So with respect, Reg, and I mean that sincerely, I stand by my post. But, admittedly, I mistakenly reached for a rifle and pulled a blunderbus out of the closet.
