Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!uunet!jarthur!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!sdd.hp.com!hplabs!hpda!hpcuhc!selmer
From: selmer@hpcuhc.cup.hp.com (Steve Elmer)
Newsgroups: comp.groupware
Subject: Re: Electronic Use (was Re: Electronic Abuse)
Message-ID: <102350002@hpcuhc.cup.hp.com>
Date: 11 Jan 91 06:32:07 GMT
References: <20816@crg5.UUCP>
Organization: Hewlett Packard, Cupertino
Lines: 10

Another possible interpretation of the "innocuous" e-mail seems more probable
to me.  The "victim" of the "abuse" reacted as he would to the spoken word -
i.e. he ran to his superior with accusations against "the other guy" to hide
his own inadequacy at doing his job.  If the communication had been verbal,
the ploy would have been credible since there would not be any PROOF available
as to who said what.  After all, it (almost?) worked even with the proof.

Some people are too shrewd for your own good...

Steve Elmer - looking for wheels within wheels