Especially considering how they fucked him about a few weeks back. Bollocks. I don't care if you think it's immoral to eavesdrop, under the same conditions I'd bet a vast majority of us would/have in the past. It's not some heinous "despicable" crime, it's curiosity. Personal curiosity is one thing. Sharing said information with the world is something else entirely. He has shown that he has no qualms about sharing private conversations with the public... now all we have is his word that he won't share other personal information, information that could very well harm other people, like Natalie Reed? Collateral damage. All over some butt-hurt response to people talking behind his back. It's pathetic. So your defence is you would be a shit in those circumstances and think I would be a shit in those circumstances therefore it is not fair to call TF a shit? Nice logic and BTW I am a person with a profession in IT. If I ever accessed previous employers emails I'd rightly expect to be shat on from a great height regardless of how badly I think I was treated by that employer. I don't want to go too crazy here, but for a minute let's assume TF was genuinely concerned about this guy's job being at stake. He has information regarding it, and the people who may be responsible. What would the harm be in telling him? As long as he removed the personal information first, there is no harm. Which he