Re: RIP Dilbert

I was responding to that quoting which started with:
> "He's not being cancelled. He's experiencing the consequences of 
> expressing his views,"

I'm not sure from whence that quoting came.  Looking back at the thread I
don't see an email that contains the original sections quoted.   

Anyway, I agree that the reasons weren't good.   As I noted celebrities
should be seen and not heard.   There's more than one actor whose work I've
enjoyed in the past that I won't watch because of some of their outrageous
behavior.   There are other actors/actresses who lend themselves to fringe
or just downright whacky products or movements.   I try to ignore what
they're doing in those areas.

-----Original Message-----
From: Ale <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Ron via Ale
Sent: Thursday, January 15, 2026 6:29 AM
To: [email protected]
Cc: Ron <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [ale] RIP Dilbert

Jeff Lightner via Ale wrote on 2026-01-14 17:04:

> Saying he wasn't "canceled" then giving the reasons why he was is a 
> bit disingenuous.

I didn't say, "he wasn't cancelled".

I said:

> The reasons weren't that unreasonable.

Then I quoted someone else saying that it was a case of consequences
instead.


The very term "cancel" is a loaded framing these days, favoured
by those who think consequences shouldn't be applied to their tribe.

(I'm NOT saying that's how you used it!)


> I didn't say there weren't good reason.  I said I didn't recall what
> they were.
And I thought it a good time to remind / inform everyone since the topic 
came up.

_______________________________________________
Ale mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale
See JOBS, ANNOUNCE and SCHOOLS lists at
http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo

_______________________________________________
Ale mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale
See JOBS, ANNOUNCE and SCHOOLS lists at
http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo