Sincere apology, Jon et al. - this was sent in error.
Promise it won't happen again.

--- On Thu, 4/2/09, Jon Fraser <jonfraser@...> wrote:


From: Jon Fraser <jonfraser@...>
Subject: Re: [DU-WATCH] Re: water
To: du-watch@yahoogroups.com
Date: Thursday, April 2, 2009, 12:54 PM






Why did these "very private" emails go to everyone?
On Apr 2, 2009, at 12:45 PM, Cathy Garger wrote:

> Very privately back...
>
> Dear Dagmar,
>
> First, thank you VERY much for your insight and comments!
>
> I have been doing a LOT of thinking. June does not have good "people
> skills" and yes, does monopolize conversations.
>
> She is, however, valuable for her knowledge and for her ability to
> give
> testimony.
>
> Yes, she goes off on tangents not even important/relevant.
>
> I can't tell her what to do on the CSEC conference calls. But I can
> and
> will be blunt with her next time on our conference call so that she
> does
> not just go off into something that is not relevant.
>
> I have learned that some people can know a whole lot, but that does
> not
> mean that they have a great ability to be a "team player."
>
> Smiling. I guess I should shut up at this point...
>
> Thanks again for sharing! And, on a different note, I do not suspect
> that
> everyone on the CSEC is on the "same page" as we are, Dagmar. Again,
> I'll hold my tongue.
>
> Hugs N Thanks!
>
> Cath
>
> --- On Thu, 4/2/09, Fabian Dagmar <fabiada@yahoo. com> wrote:
>
> From: Fabian Dagmar <fabiada@yahoo. com>
> Subject: water
> To: "Cathy Garger" <savorsuccesslady3@ yahoo.com>
> Date: Thursday, April 2, 2009, 12:18 PM
>
> Cathy,
> privately and in continuation of my previous email:
> June has to learn to be more concise when she brings up issues dear
> to her.
> She knew the agenda, but trailed off into details, particularly at
> end of the allotted hour.
> WATER IS IMPORTANT, you got to bring it up (I did first).
> She lost most of the people, including me. 1hr and 10-12 min is too
> long if you have not scheduled for it.
> She tries to hawk the conversation.
> She could have offered to send a water brief to all involved partic.
> Allison, so that she gives A. a grounding for this Fri's meeting,
> but better for the preparation of the next . But there was no point
> in going into the details of ARSENIC in this meeting.
> But of course there is time to offer her presentation at the next
> larger Dorchester meeting.
> More sensibility and politeness to your partners at the table !
> Hugs
> Dagmar
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



















[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]