Adam, your posts normally bring a dose of class, intelligence, and insightfulness to the game. No one is perfect though, and knowing a few things about these events, I feel compelled to take your public statements to task in this same public forum.
(full disclosures: Just as Adam's vocal supporters are members of his current fed, I am a recently-joined member of Andy's fed. I didn't make an issue of multicity when Andy fought against me, and I haven't made an issue of it as his ally. I'm not really Henry David Thoreau.)
My inference is that Andy made his disclosure under prompting from you.
Why? If you did it as a disinterested party, for the good of the game, I'd say kudos to you. Since you're not a disinterested party, it's more complicated.
If you did it because you felt his multi-playing gave him an unfair advantage in a pre-existing conflict, fair and fine. What advantage did he have? The main damage you cite is that Andy effectively listened in on your intra-fed conversations. You should have figured that since Andy had been head of GB, of course any number of its members might forward your messaging to him. I say there's no damage to you that wouldn't have occurred anyway.
I disagree with your decision to post your war and peace conversations with Andy, even though on a separate thread. What does your conflict with him have to do with him being a multi? Nothing, as far as I can see. The cynic in me says it's a PR ploy. You're a schoolteacher...how is that relevant? Oh yeah, Andy can't spell. He's impulsive and enjoys fighting...how is that relevant? Oh yeah, bad real-world traits...though he's exhibiting them on FB. You're just trying to paint a picture, and even though I'm sure you tried to make the brush strokes realistic, it's still you selecting the frame, canvas, and colors.
IMO the most realistic aspect of this game, and the one I dislike the most, is the tendency for people to gang up and use convenient moral arguments to justify their aggressions. Not that this was your intent, Adam, but this is how it happens. I often have more respect for the pirate's argument than for the "good of civilization" argument. The pirate justifies petty theft by saying he wants to and can, and implicitly admits that it's wrong. I'd rather live in a world where pirates run amok than in a "peaceful" one in which the gang in charge tells me where I may expand, with whom I may associate, and on and on, and then demands I acknowledge that it's all for my own good.
Bottom line, to all players: multiplaying can give unfair advantage, dozens of us ignored Andy's multiplying because we didn't think he was taking advantage, Adam was within his rights for taking issue with it, but we should beware the motives of those who would use this incident for their personal gain. --Thoreau