<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: An Open Letter to Nick Clegg</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.theliberati.net/quaequamblog/2008/09/14/an-open-letter-to-nick-clegg/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.theliberati.net/quaequamblog/2008/09/14/an-open-letter-to-nick-clegg/</link>
	<description>"crass, boorish and more a bruiser than blogger" - Alex Wilcock</description>
	<pubDate>Wed, 07 Jan 2009 22:14:13 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.3</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: James Graham</title>
		<link>http://www.theliberati.net/quaequamblog/2008/09/14/an-open-letter-to-nick-clegg/#comment-201431</link>
		<dc:creator>James Graham</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 15 Sep 2008 10:28:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.theliberati.net/quaequamblog/2008/09/14/an-open-letter-to-nick-clegg/#comment-201431</guid>
		<description>First of all Richard, I'm not blaming anyone for anything.  Clearly there was some kind of mixup, but I'm not pointing any fingers at anyone.  I merely proposed a way forward.


Secondly, I asked you a simple question and got a simple answer. I don't usually work on the assumption that I need to get a simple yes or no in triplicate before confirming it.

Thirdly, I don't see how I can be accused of "spoiling [it] for everyone else" for writing a simple letter.

It looks as if I'm damned if I do and damned if I don't.  Invite myself to the interviews and I stop someone else from being able to take part (to be honest they aren't really my thing - too many interviewees seem to expect uncritical adoration and that isn't something I do very well).  Exclude myself and I get accused of running scared - and then subsequently get accused of being a failure for exercising my right to reply.

Bottom line: if Nick expressly wanted me there, no-one told me. I'm not blaming anyone for that, but I'm amazed you think it is my fault.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>First of all Richard, I&#8217;m not blaming anyone for anything.  Clearly there was some kind of mixup, but I&#8217;m not pointing any fingers at anyone.  I merely proposed a way forward.</p>
<p>Secondly, I asked you a simple question and got a simple answer. I don&#8217;t usually work on the assumption that I need to get a simple yes or no in triplicate before confirming it.</p>
<p>Thirdly, I don&#8217;t see how I can be accused of &#8220;spoiling [it] for everyone else&#8221; for writing a simple letter.</p>
<p>It looks as if I&#8217;m damned if I do and damned if I don&#8217;t.  Invite myself to the interviews and I stop someone else from being able to take part (to be honest they aren&#8217;t really my thing - too many interviewees seem to expect uncritical adoration and that isn&#8217;t something I do very well).  Exclude myself and I get accused of running scared - and then subsequently get accused of being a failure for exercising my right to reply.</p>
<p>Bottom line: if Nick expressly wanted me there, no-one told me. I&#8217;m not blaming anyone for that, but I&#8217;m amazed you think it is my fault.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Richard Flowers</title>
		<link>http://www.theliberati.net/quaequamblog/2008/09/14/an-open-letter-to-nick-clegg/#comment-201425</link>
		<dc:creator>Richard Flowers</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 15 Sep 2008 08:13:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.theliberati.net/quaequamblog/2008/09/14/an-open-letter-to-nick-clegg/#comment-201425</guid>
		<description>Oh dear,

James, firstly please don't go blaming Nick for something that could easily be my misunderstanding or a breakdown of communications. But more importantly, you actually were invited to the interview and I wish you'd talked to me properly before saying otherwise.

Now you and I did exchange a couple of sentences of chat on Saturday afternoon just after I and others had finished interviewing Lembit, but I wouldn't go so far as to say I had "confirmed" that you were not invited to talk to Nick. 

How it actually worked was that on Monday night after the Blogger of the Year shortlist was announced I contacted the shortlistees, by e-mail or through facebook, to invite them *first*. 

But since Jock could not make it (and, as it turned out neither could Jonathan nor in the end Alix), I widened that invitation to the people who have been along to interviews before (and signed up to the e-mail list that I run to keep bloggers informed – you have a g-mail address on that list, though you may not have checked it). 

My actual words were: "I think that that would be enough even if no more attend so I won't advertise it further, but if there are any of you who would like to be added to the list that would be splendid".

So while you were not specifically and personally invited, and while it's not completely clear that the offer was open, you DID technically get an invitation, although you may not have read it or interpreted it as an invitation even if you did.

But that is your failing, and please don't go using it to go grandstanding. 

Next time you want me to confirm something, please do me the courtesy of *telling* me that you want me to confirm something before you start quoting things I haven't actually said as though you're some tabloid hack; it seriously undermines any value that you might have put into the rest of your argument.

Nick has been very generous with his time and his office put in a lot of work to let ordinary Lib Dem Bloggers get extraordinary access to the top of the Party. I'd rather you didn't spoil that for everyone else just to score some cheap debating point.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Oh dear,</p>
<p>James, firstly please don&#8217;t go blaming Nick for something that could easily be my misunderstanding or a breakdown of communications. But more importantly, you actually were invited to the interview and I wish you&#8217;d talked to me properly before saying otherwise.</p>
<p>Now you and I did exchange a couple of sentences of chat on Saturday afternoon just after I and others had finished interviewing Lembit, but I wouldn&#8217;t go so far as to say I had &#8220;confirmed&#8221; that you were not invited to talk to Nick. </p>
<p>How it actually worked was that on Monday night after the Blogger of the Year shortlist was announced I contacted the shortlistees, by e-mail or through facebook, to invite them *first*. </p>
<p>But since Jock could not make it (and, as it turned out neither could Jonathan nor in the end Alix), I widened that invitation to the people who have been along to interviews before (and signed up to the e-mail list that I run to keep bloggers informed – you have a g-mail address on that list, though you may not have checked it). </p>
<p>My actual words were: &#8220;I think that that would be enough even if no more attend so I won&#8217;t advertise it further, but if there are any of you who would like to be added to the list that would be splendid&#8221;.</p>
<p>So while you were not specifically and personally invited, and while it&#8217;s not completely clear that the offer was open, you DID technically get an invitation, although you may not have read it or interpreted it as an invitation even if you did.</p>
<p>But that is your failing, and please don&#8217;t go using it to go grandstanding. </p>
<p>Next time you want me to confirm something, please do me the courtesy of *telling* me that you want me to confirm something before you start quoting things I haven&#8217;t actually said as though you&#8217;re some tabloid hack; it seriously undermines any value that you might have put into the rest of your argument.</p>
<p>Nick has been very generous with his time and his office put in a lot of work to let ordinary Lib Dem Bloggers get extraordinary access to the top of the Party. I&#8217;d rather you didn&#8217;t spoil that for everyone else just to score some cheap debating point.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
