Re: Oracle and Donald Rumsfeld

<fitzjarrell_at_cox.net> wrote in message
news:1111609613.520298.65800_at_z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
>
> hpuxrac wrote:
>> snip
>>
>> > Interesting presentation, and it appears to be very similar to a
>> JoHari
>> > windoe:
>>
>> I agree it does resemble things I have seen previously. If JoHari is
>> the original author/inventor ( or whomever ) it looks like Mr. Lewis
>> should acknowledge as such.
>
> I made no accusations with my post, simply an observation of the
> simiarities. Obviously the content is Jonathan's own work and I
> intended to solicit no apologies or acknowledgements.
>
> Sheesh, a guy can't make a comment around here ... :)
>
> David Fitzjarrell
>

I sent this reply out shortly after David's post. Unfortunately I hit 'reply' rather than 'reply group', so I've reposted today:

---

Don't worry, I took the observation in the spirit
it was offered - it was an interesting side-note that
the same sort of layout can be used to represent
many things. Johari windows come in pairs, of course,
which is the more interesting aspect of the way in which
the presentation can be used.

---

(To clarify the last line above - 'presentation'  was supposed
to mean 'Johari Window style of representing interaction').



David's first line was:
    "Interesting presentation, and it appears to be very similar to a JoHari 
window"
So I followed his link to see what JoHari window's were
because it might have been interesting.


If his first line had been (capitalised to make sure you spot the 
difference)
    "Interesting presentation, BUT it appears to be very similar to a JoHari 
window"
I would have thought "I wonder what JoHari windows are about then"
and followed the link.



If his first line had been:
    "Interesting presentation, but you're claiming credit for inventing the
    JoHari window and ought to apologise to Joseph Luft and Harry Ingham
    whose work you have shamelessly plagiarised."

I would have followed the link, then explained in words of two
or less syllables why his comment was lacking in credibility.




As it is -
    It never cross my mind that David might be casting aspersions

    I do not believe (after reviewing the evidence) that he was
    casting aspersions

    I've read an interesting little bit of information outside my specialist
    subject that I wouldn't otherwise have come across - so I'm quite
    glad that he made the comment.

    I've found yet another reason for carving a square up into four
    little boxes.




-- 
Regards

Jonathan Lewis

http://www.jlcomp.demon.co.uk/faq/ind_faq.html
The Co-operative Oracle Users' FAQ

http://www.jlcomp.demon.co.uk/seminar.html
Public Appearances - schedule updated March 9th 2005