Anyone want to take bets that Nora's boss came up with the other reason for the meeting AFTER they got the email?

Raises hand.

It might not have been as direct a thought process as, "Busted! What else can I get on her for?". But if we had a psychic lying about I'd bet folding money that the mental list of things you "needed to talk about" when he sent the email started with "your attitude" and included one or two other things... and when he got your email thought, "Well, of COURSE I wouldn't be upset with her for THAT, it was these other things. Her shivering and soaked just made them occur to me, that's all."

It's no-win, Nora. If you hadn't sent the email and tomorrow's meeting had started with "your attitude" your explaination would have been met with "You should have TOLD me, we can't let these things escalate."

The thing is, I get called out for dumb ass shit often enough that I'm pretty paranoid. So maybe if he stopped calling me out on all these tiny non-perfect things (that are seriously ridiculous), I wouldn't have jumped to conclusions. Which I will likely say in some form or another.

If you can find away to say something like "you have called me in to speak about my passing reactions before...so I am glad this meeting is about something substantial"

Nora--He sounds like a total tool, but you can't control his reactions--being anal and picky and overly demanding--you can only control your own. So I would go in there and admit you jumped to a conclusion and that you will try to avoid that in the future without telling him how it's his fault EVEN IF IT IS. I don't think he can hear it and just makes you sound defensive. The next time he does snipe at you is the time to bring up that it is overeacting and counterproductive and you pwould prefer if he said x instead of Y.

Frankly, I would not like to get an email from my employee telling me they know I am going to yell at them and that I shouldn't, and I think any boss would react by wanting to talk to you about it. That doesn't mean your boss is right, just that it's not good strategy. No one likes to be taken to task for something they didn't even do--even if they have done stuff like that before.

No one likes to be taken to task for something they didn't even do--even if they have done stuff like that before.

I know. I am at the end of my rope though, and occasionally it shows through more than I'd like it to.

I know. I am at the end of my rope though, and occasionally it shows through more than I'd like it to.

Too bad that's not the preferred kind of frantic.

OMG, Nora's working for Michael Scott! Oh well, probably better that than Ari Gold. Probably.

P.-C., so she got hurt and upset because you ... answered her question, without elaborating or embellishing it with casual pleasantries, because you were busy? Man. I must be pissing people off left and right, then.

P.-C., so she got hurt and upset because you ... answered her question, without elaborating or embellishing it with casual pleasantries, because you were busy? Man. I must be pissing people off left and right, then.

Heh. It was not my most grievous moment of condescension, no, but I may have been a little snappish. In any case, it's good to note that, hey, she's maybe a little oversensitive!

It is interesting ...

I always think of manners as oil for gears. It makes thing smoother.

My own way of speaking is very abrupt. I forget please and thank you way too much. As in I notice a big difference in reactions when I am not quite as abrupt.

I always think of manners as oil for gears. It makes thing smoother.

This! This! Part of the reason the various writers I've worked with at the Big Tech Co. all like me as an editor is because I say "please" and "thank you". Even when I want to beat them with the style guide.