A group of beavers were building a dam.
Beaver A and B were building the left flank,
and beaver C and D the right.
Maybe Beaver A was slower,
perhaps beaver A was weaker,
perhaps beaver A had a camp on the following day and was instructed to rest but went on helping the build the dam anyway because of fellowship.

Yes then, Beaver A was weaker, slower, less skillful. Fine.
Need Beaver B be so mean?
Why did beaver B need to harp on the inadequacies and incompetency of beaver A long after that?
Was he not suppose to support beaver A, instead of being annoyingly sarcastic?
Maybe Beaver B was just careless, careless enough to go on muttering under his breath about beaver A.
Maybe Beaver B expected Beaver A to feel motivated and strive harder despite the evident lack of tolerance and understanding Beaver B displayed.
On the right flank, beaver C and D starts wondering "why are the beavers of the left flank so low in morale?"

Perhaps Beaver B had scoffed deep down inside, "low morale? ask Beaver A then!"
more sarcastic remarks.
more more-than-obvious signs of impatience.
and yes.... Beaver A is supposed to be in high morale despite all this eh Beaver A?

It is inevitable that the biggest maybe comes to mind.
Maybe, the beavers need another beaver. A better one.

Beaver A would be more than happy never to build dams again.