<div class="gmail_quote">On Feb 12, 2008 5:27 PM, Chasuk <<a href="mailto:chasuk@gmail.com">chasuk@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="PADDING-LEFT: 1ex; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; BORDER-LEFT: #ccc 1px solid">
<div class="Ih2E3d">On Feb 12, 2008 5:20 PM, Ted Moffett <<a href="mailto:starbliss@gmail.com">starbliss@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>\<br>> This indicates clearly that Mr. Steed knew Garrett might post his response<br>
> to the list, and asked him not to. But I disagree with Mr. Steeds decision,<br>> and the obvious avoidance of Vision2020 by many public officials, to refuse<br>> to engage in dialog on Vision2020.<br><br></div>
I took it to mean that he knew that Garrett was posting his emails to<br>Vision2020, and wished for Garrett to make clear that this<br>second-hand participation was not an invitation to contact him<br>directly. Garrett complied by publishing that excerpt.<br>
</blockquote>
<div> </div>
<div> </div>
<div>I understand this interpretation. </div>
<div> </div>
<div>But if Mr. Steed is open to all e-mails from private individuals, as he wrote below,</div>
<div> </div>
<div>"I try to respond promptly at all e-mails sent directly to me by individuals,,,"</div>
<div> </div>
<div>this might contradict the statement he does not want Garrett to "incite Vision2020 to start sending everything to me..." as he also wrote.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>So is Mr. Steed open to anyone subscribed to Vision2020 contacting him privately? Or was he saying he did not want a flood of private e-mails from Vision2020 subscribers?</div>
<div> </div>
<div>For Garrett to post his responses to the list certainly might invite many private and/or public responses, no matter who wishes what.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Ted Moffett</div></div>