Given the "100 postings" philosophy, Wig Wag, I did think that "management" had been fair in finding or suggesting a new home for the thread, and that the explanation for the second deletion must lie elsewhere than with management. This is now confirmed.
Ethical problems are rarely simple, and although I demurred at Devil's Advocate's cavalier approach, as I perceived it, one may (a) have unspoken concerns at third party situations and (b) find oneself tempted or even forced to "express" a view, explicitly or tacitly. X may be asked by Y for an assessment of Z, whose employment X had, unknown to Y, terminated for, say, incompetence or dishonesty. X has not sought to interfere, but his silence in response may be as much an implied condemnation of Z as a reasoned comment; but reasoned comment, however fair, may land X in trouble if Z finds out. None of this was of X's seeking.
These are not uncommon problems, and this thread was touching on them, so ..... someone did delete the thread: Why?
[ 09 September 2001: Message edited by: Davaar ]
[ 09 September 2001: Message edited by: Davaar ]