The Julie Linden saga draws to a close
According to a recent Computerworld article, the mysterious Julie Linden who stalked the pages of this blog a couple of years ago was none other than the executive director of the itSMFUSA, Jim Prunty. That pisses me off.
Prunty played me for a dupe, and I trusted him. Few things make me madder than violation of trust, except of course violation of my trust.
I'm not sure if it is ironic or just plain sick that Prunty was trying to set himself up as a consultant on professional associations. God knows what he thought he was going to provoke and then unravel. All he has managed to do is display his own ethical workings to the world.
He also had delusions that the Department of Justice would get involved in the whole conspiracy.
It is all very disappointing.
There are a few aspects of this that continue to trouble me. Given some of the stuff Prunty told me it is still not impossible that he is the one who has been duped and silenced. How far would a major corporation stoop to to defend a billion dollars in revenue? I know one not too far from this story which lied to goverment investigators and instructed its staff to perjure themselves.
But I doubt it. The reason I went along with Prunty's little game in the first place was Occam's razor: it was easier to believe that someone had fiddled the election result to get on the Board than that somebody would fake the fiddling in order to hatch an elaborate scheme to discredit the Board. Nobody would be that stupid, right?
So now do I believe that dark forces have fixed Jim up to silence him? or that he hatched this himself? Occam says Prunty did it.
In the end I had decided on this conclusion before the recent Computerworld article, but needed confirmation.
It's ethics Jim, but not as we know it.
Made in New Zealand 
