<<<Yes. In context: when one is indirectly quoting, or "characterizing", it ought to be clear, and it is sloppy not to do so. But joe is not a journalist, etc. ...>>>
And I have given evidence that his insinuations are systematic and frequent and that he has had ample opportunity to rectify any sloppiness, once it had been called to his attention. I wonder why you think it likelier that a person who defiles by insinuation so frequently was, in this case, merely "sloppy," especially when he has never said he didn't mean it as a quote. Only you have proffered that rationalization.
You wrote
Third, if he made such allegations, and I have some vague recollection of them, sure, I think he should apologize. But I have no special leverage with him to get him to do so.
Oh, I did see that. I didn't recognize it as an acknowledgment that the other things he did were wrong, but I accept it as that.
Since you acknowledge that, I am all the more puzzled by your belief in his good will in the matter of the inaccurate "quote." |
