On Fri, 30 Nov 2007 11:27:03 -0800 (PST), Ken Arromdee
<arromdee(a)rahul.net> wrote:
> Giano was not a party to the email, did not have
the consent of the
> sender of the email to publish it, and did not respect the privacy
> of the sender.
He sent the email to expose misconduct on the part of
the sender. That makes
those points moot, as well as obviously being the reason arbcom is coming
down on him so hard for posting it. Nobody *likes* having their or their
friends' misconduct exposed.
The word "expose" is telling here. Had he wished to provide
evidence or assist the investigation, then this could have been done
without publication. Giano gave every impression of wanting to
cause maximum damage. Giano has, since then, done nothing to
correct that impression.
We are not supposed to reach for the tar and feathers here.
Guy (JzG)
--
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:JzG