Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!ncar!mailrus!accuvax.nwu.edu!nucsrl!telecom-request
From: garif@cmcl2.nyu.edu (Major Panic)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Industry Ethics (Was: Telecom Humour)
Message-ID: <12759@accuvax.nwu.edu>
Date: 28 Sep 90 18:07:42 GMT
Sender: news@accuvax.nwu.edu
Organization: New York University
Lines: 53
Approved: Telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 10, Issue 691, Message 12 of 12


AMillar@cup.portal.com writes:

>Now, anyone who posts a controversial view is open to flamage,
>including Pat (and me for this message).  And responsibility is always
>controversial.  But I congratulate Pat for taking a stand, and not
>sitting by siliently.

I submit that "responsibility" is not controversial.  Its when an
individual clearly takes a stand that needn't be taken that questions
about that person arise. (In some cases you may read "controversial"
as "confrontational".)

>Yes, it is probably true that we can expect these things to happen.
>But no way should we condone them!

This is a forum of supposedly intelligent people discussing points of
interest.  Society dictates what is and is not acceptable.  It is
clear to me that everyone here understands the essential difference
between right and wrong.  Preaching about it in this forum SHOULD
invite scrutiny.  Do you take us all for fools?

>We should all lighten up when it comes to fraud or perhaps incest
>because these things too are just GOING to happen, right?  But wait,
>those are serious, and we're only talking about harmless pranks.
>Calling a person of a particular ethnic background a derogatory name
>is all in good fun; can't they take a joke?

Not "WE should all...", YOU should.  Its quite plain that such
behaviour is looked down upon and often illegal.  Why must you bring
it up?

>"It's going to happen anyways" is a cop-out.  If you don't take a
>stand against unethical behaviour, then you are supporting it BY
>DEFAULT.

Sorry, I don't agree with you there.  I believe that the Usenet
community as a whole to be quite intelligent and it would be contrary
to that belief to say "oh, there goes a bad joke, quick: remind
everyone its wrong to espouse genocide, kill people randomly, ad
nauseum..."

I guess when places like Portal let just anybody post, this should
have been expected :-) Does this mean that every time someone posts
anything even slightly "bad", they'd better have a copious amount of
disclaimer or law-abiding verse to accompany???

sheesh, 'nuff said.

Lee-bo()

p.s. Note that my questions were rhetorical in nature - let's see if
     someone out there just can't let this rest.