Seth Goodman wrote: >>From: Weissgerber, Tom L [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>Sent: Friday, November 11, 2005 10:43 AM >>To: debian-user@lists.debian.org; Weissgerber, Tom L >>Subject: Request to remove Information >> >> >>Debian, >>The following information should not have been made available >>to the entire public domain. Please remove the following >>links/files at your earliest convenience. >>Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 10:57:42 -0700 >>Message-id: >><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>In-reply-to: >><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>Message-id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>Old-return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>References: >><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>Reply-to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >> >>Regards >> >>Tom Weissgerber >>Intel Corporation >>Validation Tool Development Manager >>916-356-5339 >> > > > This is both funny and tragic at the same time.
I find it hysterically funny. On the other hand reading his original email just pissed me off. I can see why he wanted it to go away. I can't help but wonder why he didn't ask in 2003 (or did he?). Not that it matters. Even if it were removed from this archive, that leaves the umpteen others out there still carrying it (yes this has been pointed out several times now, I just felt like repeating it). Good luck, Tommy boy, you'll need it! > You post a private memo > that puts your employer in a very bad light to a high-traffic public > mailing list. In case anyone might wonder what you could do to top > something that dumb, you satisfy their curiosity by making a second post > to the same list requesting the first post be removed from the archives. > I understand that it is a little hard to talk with both feet in your > mouth, but maybe you could take one foot out for long enough to explain > your bizarre request? What's really funny is this: I first saw this post (the one that started this thread) when there were maybe a just a few responses to it. Since that time it's grown into a rather large thread, where he's been repeatedly quoted. This of course puts his faux pas out there over and over again. If I had been dumb enough to make the first mistake, I'd have been smart enough not to make the second. At the very least, addressing it to debian-user-request, would have prevented um... well. this message you're now reading! His mailbox will probably be pretty full come Monday morning, I'm sure. I've embarrassed the hell out of myself any number of times on mailing lists and newsgroups by carelessly hitting the "send" button. I've learned the best thing to do at that point is just let it go and forget you did it. In public forums such as this, such mistakes go away pretty quickly. After all I think I only saw two replies to his original. > > What's interesting about this is why would Intel, as a company, be > concerned with removing a two-year-old memo from the public record? Was > Intel truly unaware in 2003 of the massive unpopularity of such greedy > behavior? Do they really think that by removing such small pieces from > the public record that they can deny their involvement with the massive > outsourcing binge of which their technology center in Bangalore was at > the forefront? This is really curious. Assuming this is something like > their motive, why would they send the same fool who did the damage in > the first place? Thank you, Tom, for being who you are. Without your > help, we might never have thought about this incident again. Being that my last job was sent to India (not me, just the job) this just got me riled all over again. And it is interesting that Tommy boy (or Intel) took over 2 years to decide his original message wasn't a good idea. Still the should have pretended it never happened and they would have been better off than they are now. Thus may end up being the longest thread seen here in some time. :-) -- Scott www.angrykeyboarder.com © 2005 angrykeyboarder & Elmer Fudd. All Wights Wesewved
