SHinrichs9@aol.com wrote:
> > I respond only to make it clear that I did not exhibit unchristian
> behavior in publicly speaking so bluntly. My post was to you alone, not to
> the ASA list. Making private posts public is considered improper if not
> unethical.
> David F. Siemens, Jr.
>
> I made the post public because you were digressing into unjustified useless
> stereotyping and name-calling. My past experience has been people who make
> such digressions are less likely to do so if their comments are made public.
> I have no interest in such digressions and prefer to keep the discussion
> constructive; thus, I prefer to carry the discussion in public rather than
> private. Such was my motivation which is not unethical. In fact your final
> response indicates you do not prefer your insults to be made public so you
> confirmed my intuition.
Dave's point, that making private messages public without the consult of
their sender is unethical, is correct, & is altered neither by your saying it
wasn't nor by any arguments, valid or not, about the appropriateness of his
language. Making _res privata_ into _res publica_ is of course understandable if
done in error - as can easily happen with email - but you make it clear that you
did so intentionally.
George Murphy
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jan 11 2001 - 10:00:42 EST