[jet]

Originally Posted by Stormy

It was not strategy or betrayal on James part, it was egotism and self-righteousness. In his mind he believed he was doing the right thing.

James has a moral set of codes, which is fine for him...but he preaches too much and thinks he needs to teach Austin a lesson.

Personally, I think James went too far. As much as I dislike Austin's behaviour, it's not James' business to teach Austin a lesson. Honestly, he's only known the bloke for a few weeks...he's not his brother or his father and it's very egotistical for James to think he must 'punish' Austin.

Did James say he did it to 'teach him a lesson and punish him' though? I just heard him say he was nominating him because his "behaviour was wrong" which it was. Not any different from what the other 3 who nominated Austin said...
James and Austin are sort of seen as joined at the hip and a 'pair'. If one person of a pair behaves horrendously and the other says nothing, it looks as if they condone it and then it kind of reflects on them too. So they speak to the other person and hope they listen...but they ignore them...so they speak to them about it once more and are ignored again....and so on....really I think James was between a rock and a hard place. If he'd said nothing to Austin people would be saying he was a suck ass or not a good friend! I agree with you that he goes on too much but I think he's stubborn and doesn't like his well meaning advice being ignored. ha!