Might I respond?
The fact that you were 'right' about my misdeeds in no way alters the nature of your unethical behaviour.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kohlberg%27s_stages_of_moral_development
Nor does it excuse the Arb.s currently voting from failing to disclose any prejudicial discussion (is it really due process to expect Arb.s who have already 'sanity checked' your decision in advance of your block, to then 'review' that block, and further 'vote' in the arb case? - that's a real triple whammy.)
Previous responses have been moderated on some grounds - please allow this to post.
Many thanks,
PM. http://just-some-privatemusings.blogspot.com/
On Wed, 28 Nov 2007 08:59:36 +1100, "private musings"
thepmaccount@gmail.com wrote:
Personal information which I had submitted privately to Guy, with a
request for that privacy to be respected, was shared by him.
With a very small number of people, for purposes of sanity checking.
They agreed with me. So does the Arbitration Committee, by the looks of things.
Guy (JzG)
--
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:JzG
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: