"Paul Stuart" wrote in message
oups.com...
Mr Weir
Sometimes you carry that EAA chip on your shoulder to truly ridiculous
levels. Mr Lawrence has posted a detailed, informative and totally
understandable reply to the questions raised. He did so on
Thanksgiving Day... If you can't find it within yourself to recognize
that these are actually COMMENDABLE traits in an EAA employee, for
goodness' sake don't go on the attack about it. You really do come
across as a keyboard warrior of the pettiest kind.
Paul Stuart

When he chose to comment, or even if he chose to comment, is no concern to
me, or of anyone else reading the letter. If Thanksgiving was a bad day to
be writing, then he should have waited until a better time.

A person in a position of leadership, in an organization such as EAA, is
accountable to it's members. In this case, the membership and non
membership public reading a letter in an open forum will carry away an
impression directly related to the quality of said presentation. He only
had one chance to make a first impression, and the impression carried away
by members, and the public in this case, could only be one questioning the
competence, ability and intelligence of the person writing the letter.

A typo here and there, or a *few* grammatical errors is not a good thing,
but is somewhat forgivable. The quantity of errors contained in the letter
goes *way* past that level.

Missing the spelling of a key technical term that the author was in charge
of researching, and the obvious total lack of proofreading is past
acceptable, and he deserves admonishment.

That is my opinion, and I would think other's as well. YMMV.
--
Jim in NC
EAA member, also questioning if the research undertaken on ethanol was
supervised in a competent manner.