[Vision2020] Crabtree's Breach Of Trust Serious Ethical Fault

[Ted Moffett]

Crabtree et. al.

I'm not sure if anyone else has expressed on Vision2020 the assessment I
make below, but either way, it needs to be said:

You took a private e-mail, clearly labeled to remain private, and foisted it
upon this public list, with full deliberation.  It is an unwritten rule on
Vision2020 to not deliberately take private e-mail and post it to the list.
And in general, in private discussions between two people, in many cases,
when discussion gets heated, there are often things said that both parties
know are not meant to be made public.  And if someone uses a private
statement made in this situation to slam someone publicly, it amounts to
back stabbing.

What was privately between you and Joe should have remained between you and
Joe.  If you really believed there was a serious threat, which is doubtful
in the extreme, you could have taken your case privately to law enforcement,
who probably would have just laughed (silently to themselves, of course.)

I regard your breach of the trust that is extended on Vision2020 to not make
private e-mail public to be a far more serious ethical fault than any
statement Joe made.

You have not seized any moral high ground, despite what Scott Dredge so
blithely asserted.  In fact, I would caution anyone who subscribes to
Vision2020 to not send you private e-mail unless they can accept the e-mail
ending up on this public list.

Ted Moffett


On 5/20/06, g. crabtree <jampot at adelphia.net > wrote:
>
>  Please, lets get something straight and put an end to the nonsense about
> what is and is not battery or assault with regard to Joe's little nastygram.
> I never at any time considered for so much as a second filing a complaint. I
> tossed around no "legal jargon" and I made no attempt to
> "counter-intimidate." While I don't believe for a second that the threat was
> a joke made in all good fun, my only concern was for Joe hurting one of his
> dainty little fingers when it came in contact with my face. Damaged digits
> would make it difficult for the poor, abused dear to peck out his next
> epistle on tolerance after all. For what its worth, I readily accept Joe's
> apology such as it was and I am sorry that he feels he's such a victim. I
> thought that Joisey Boys were supposed to be made of sterner stuff.
> Apparently, another myth busted. Call Adam & Jamie. All this having been
> said, how's about we leave this spot of unpleasantness in the archives and
> move forward with fresh foolishness. My sadistic streak yearns to bait some
> new, wide eyed innocent into fits of apoplexy. (Imagine the sound of hands
> being rubbed together briskly while slathering chops are licked in
> antici.....pation.)
>
> gc
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20060520/089bcad4/attachment.htm