John Doe Case 72-11 Selective Emphasis Competence-Deception Boundary Compliance
O · Obligation
Individual
http://proethica.org/ontology/case/135#John_Doe_Case_72-11_Selective_Emphasis_Competence-Deception_Boundary_Compliance
Properties
Instance of
SelectiveEmphasisCompetence-DeceptionBoundaryComplianceObligation
http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#SelectiveEmphasisCompetence-DeceptionBoundaryComplianceObligation
Case context
John Doe, laid off after 12 years as a design engineer, rewrote his resume to emphasize minor managerial experience for management positions. The Board found this permissible because Doe could truthfully show some degree of competence in the emphasized area.
Compliance status
met
Confidence
0.88
Importance
medium
Obligated party
John Doe (Case 72-11)
Obligation statement
John Doe was obligated to ensure that his resume's selective emphasis of managerial and administrative experience remained within the permissible zone — i.e., that the emphasis did not deceive the prospective employer about his actual competence for the management role sought — and the Board found he met this obligation because he genuinely possessed some degree of competence in the emphasized area.
Temporal scope
At the time of resume rewriting and submission (Case 72-11)
Relationships
competesWith
Case 79-5 Diploma Mill Ph D Engineer Resume Implication-Based Misrepresentation, Engineer A Progressive Ethics Code Broadening Retroactive Non-Application Acknowledgment, Engineer A Resume Implication-Based Misrepresentation Prohibition
defeasibleUnder
Engineer A Failure to Credit Design Team Members, Engineer A Implied Sole Credit on Resume, Joint Team Design Credit Held by Six Engineers
derivedFromPrinciple
Contextual Resume Emphasis Permissibility — Case 72-11 John Doe
Source Evidence
Source text
In concluding that Doe was not in violation of the Code for rewriting his employment resume in this manner, we were inclined to the more charitable view that Doe's action can be condoned as something less than an 'exaggeration' in that it more nearly might be considered a degree of emphasis.
Text references
In Case 72-11, we found that Doe could truthfully show some degree of competence in the managerial and administrative technical areas of the employment even though Doe strongly emphasized its extent and level.
In concluding that Doe was not in violation of the Code for rewriting his employment resume in this manner, we were inclined to the more charitable view that Doe's action can be condoned as something less than an 'exaggeration' in that it more nearly might be considered a degree of emphasis.
TTL
@prefix case135: <http://proethica.org/ontology/case/135#> .
@prefix owl: <http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#> .
@prefix proeth: <http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#> .
@prefix proeth-core: <http://proethica.org/ontology/core#> .
@prefix prov: <http://www.w3.org/ns/prov#> .
@prefix rdfs: <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#> .
@prefix xsd: <http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#> .
case135:John_Doe_Case_72-11_Selective_Emphasis_Competence-Deception_Boundary_Compliance a proeth:SelectiveEmphasisCompetence-DeceptionBoundaryComplianceObligation,
owl:NamedIndividual ;
rdfs:label "John Doe Case 72-11 Selective Emphasis Competence-Deception Boundary Compliance" ;
proeth-core:competesWith case135:Case_79-5_Diploma_Mill_PhD_Engineer_Resume_Implication-Based_Misrepresentation,
case135:Engineer_A_Progressive_Ethics_Code_Broadening_Retroactive_Non-Application_Acknowledgment,
case135:Engineer_A_Resume_Implication-Based_Misrepresentation_Prohibition ;
proeth-core:defeasibleUnder case135:Engineer_A_Failure_to_Credit_Design_Team_Members,
case135:Engineer_A_Implied_Sole_Credit_on_Resume,
case135:Joint_Team_Design_Credit_Held_by_Six_Engineers ;
proeth:casecontext "John Doe, laid off after 12 years as a design engineer, rewrote his resume to emphasize minor managerial experience for management positions. The Board found this permissible because Doe could truthfully show some degree of competence in the emphasized area." ;
proeth:compliancestatus "met" ;
proeth:conceptCategory "Obligation" ;
proeth:confidence "0.88" ;
proeth:derivedFromPrinciple <http://proethica.org/ontology/case/135#Contextual_Resume_Emphasis_Permissibility_—_Case_72-11_John_Doe> ;
proeth:discoveredincase "135" ;
proeth:discoveredinpass "2" ;
proeth:discoveredinsection "discussion" ;
proeth:firstdiscoveredat "2026-03-01T15:48:54.714289+00:00" ;
proeth:firstdiscoveredincase "135" ;
proeth:generatedattime "2026-03-01T15:48:54.714289+00:00" ;
proeth:importance "medium" ;
proeth:obligatedparty "John Doe (Case 72-11)" ;
proeth:obligationclass "Selective Emphasis Competence-Deception Boundary Compliance Obligation" ;
proeth:obligationstatement "John Doe was obligated to ensure that his resume's selective emphasis of managerial and administrative experience remained within the permissible zone — i.e., that the emphasis did not deceive the prospective employer about his actual competence for the management role sought — and the Board found he met this obligation because he genuinely possessed some degree of competence in the emphasized area." ;
proeth:sourcetext "In concluding that Doe was not in violation of the Code for rewriting his employment resume in this manner, we were inclined to the more charitable view that Doe's action can be condoned as something less than an 'exaggeration' in that it more nearly might be considered a degree of emphasis." ;
proeth:temporalscope "At the time of resume rewriting and submission (Case 72-11)" ;
proeth:textreferences "In Case 72-11, we found that Doe could truthfully show some degree of competence in the managerial and administrative technical areas of the employment even though Doe strongly emphasized its extent and level.",
"In concluding that Doe was not in violation of the Code for rewriting his employment resume in this manner, we were inclined to the more charitable view that Doe's action can be condoned as something less than an 'exaggeration' in that it more nearly might be considered a degree of emphasis." ;
proeth:wasattributedto "Case 135 Extraction" ;
prov:generatedAtTime "2026-03-01T15:57:44.751409"^^xsd:dateTime ;
prov:wasGeneratedBy "ProEthica Case 135 Extraction" .
Metadata
Extraction details
Discovered in case
135
Discovered in pass
2
Discovered in section
discussion
First discovered
2026-03-01T15:48:54.714289+00:00
First case
135
Generated
2026-03-01T15:48:54.714289+00:00
Attributed to
Case 135 Extraction
Generated
2026-03-01T15:57:44.751409
Generated by
ProEthica Case 135 Extraction