--- In [email protected], Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: <snip> > On Aug 31, 2007, at 2:06 PM, authfriend wrote: > > > Vaj means to say, of course, "It's pretty strange for > > an editor to claim they're different." He's the one > > claiming there's no distinction between them. > > No, that's not what I'm claiming.
"But damned if I know what I *was* claiming," right, Vaj? Maybe that's because you carefully snipped all the context so *nobody* could tell what it was you were claiming? Allow me to refresh your memory: You were claiming that Peter's diagnosis was no different from Barry making comments about past events--i.e., that neither was unethical. In fact, they are *very* different, in several quite obvious ways; and while Barry's comments are of course not unethical, Peter's diagnosis most certainly is highly unethical. As I said, anybody--especially if they claim to have expertise in psychology--who doesn't think these two actions have very different ethical implications needs their head examined (funny, you snipped that too).
