Tokyo,
I stand by my opinion of your last two notes. The first note, threatening, indeed sinister, and the second note unethical -- in my view.
I did not say it is unethical to use a pseudonym, however. In itself that is not unethical. I do think that the lack of ethical judgment in your posting his personal information is hilighted by your hiding behind your own anonymity.
Ethics are to some extent subjective, of course. For that reason, I cannot quarrel with your opinion that I need education in the subject, any more than you can quarrel with my opinion, that your last two notes were morally reprehensible.
I stated no objection to your telling me to walk to Keith's office, but I think the location of his office and the other information that you posted, was not yours to post.
If Keith misstated facts, I have no reason to assume that he did so out of intent. Thus, your phrasing of the question (BTW, what is your opinion of Dr. Keith's misstatements regarding facts? Isn't that "unethical"?) is objectionable to me, for your premise is that it is his intention to deceive. My assumption is that if he is wrong, it is because he misunderstands some information, or is unaware of some information.
Taking the attitude you have taken does not induce anyone to take your view. You aren't discussing the issues of the stock or the product. You are attempting to demean rather than discuss.
I've said all I have to say about this, and I'll return to lurking mode now. I won't respond to further arguments on this subject. If I did, it would be repetitive and also off the subject of the thread.
Linda |
