Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/17/84; site rduxb.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!rduxb!2141smh
From: 2141smh@rduxb.UUCP (henning)
Newsgroups: net.travel
Subject: Re: Caution - Paris/Lima/London/Florence/New York/...
Message-ID: <385@rduxb.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 12-Apr-85 11:20:58 EST
Article-I.D.: rduxb.385
Posted: Fri Apr 12 11:20:58 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 13-Apr-85 05:17:43 EST
References: <2177@cca.UUCP>, <887@homxa.UUCP> <876@houxf.UUCP>
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Reading, PA
Lines: 17

>    Pete is right and we should be thankful that they do exist, we can
> re-affirm "honesty is the best policy" by making sure that we reward
> honesty whenever we can.   
> I've been on both ends of the lost/found situation and when the 
> reward was less than 10% I found myself wondering if I shouldn't
> have kept the item myself !!!! Think about it .

Personally, I would never reward someone who was "honest" so that
they could get a reward.  If they were genuinely "honest", they
would not solicit a reward and one would have to be genuinely
creative to find a way to express their thanks in an amount greater
than just compensating them for their time and expense.  A reward
of 10% sounds like the rip-off lawyers pull on the victims they
"help". :-)
There are times when 200% would be more appropriate, such as
keepsakes, and others when anything would be inappropriate, such
as professionals who are doing their job with a smile.