I've already pointed out that if Arrington's complied with the tax rules and standards, his action have met one definition of fairness, which is not at all besi

I've already pointed out that if Arrington's complied with the tax rules and standards, his action have met one definition of fairness, which is not at all beside the point. To argue fairness or unfairness by other definitions, you have to take a position on those laws. Otherwise, you rule out such judgments, which leads us back to the question "did he play by the rules?"