To: Havoc
I've read it plenty here, let's cut it to the crux of the biscuit:
"you have an ethical responsibility not to undercut"
That's YOUR statement. You say undercutting is unethical. Sure you only want it to be unethical in a specific circumstance where it hurts you and you have no problem with it happening when you benefit, but that's just because you're a hypocrite.
Like I said, if undercutting is unethical once then it needs to be unethical always. Otherwise you're just making up rules to protect your own butt, which is highly unethical... always.
527 posted on
04/12/2004 4:01:11 PM PDT by
discostu
(Brick urgently required, must be thick and well kept)
To: discostu
I've read it plenty here, let's cut it to the crux of the biscuit: "you have an ethical responsibility not to undercut" Now you're editing me to make me say something I didn't. What's the matter, can't deal with the full quote - you haven't yet. All you've proven to this moment is that you can Quote someone then lift part of the quote. Let's see how that works shall we:
"this guy was running down the streat yelling and screaming that 'I want to kill the president of the company'"
What you're doing is editing me - so you can say that I said: "'I want to kill the president"
See how obvious, easy and utterly unethical that is. Course you can't busy yourself with the ethics of it, you've got too much on your hands tryin to desperately grasp at straws for something you think you can argue to make your position look better. It ain't there - even with you editing me. I'll give you a favorite edit that Walter Martin used to use to display the use of collapsing contexts. "judas went out and hanged himself. Go and do ye likewise" And then you leap of the cliff with the falacy that if something is wrong in one instance it is therefore always wrong. A notion any 10th grade debator with any ethics at all could shoot down handily.
533 posted on
04/12/2004 4:18:24 PM PDT by
Havoc
("The line must be drawn here. This far and no further!")
To: discostu; Havoc
527 - "Like I said, if undercutting is unethical once then it needs to be unethical always. Otherwise you're just making up rules to protect your own butt, which is highly unethical... always."
Undercutting to the detriment of our society is unethical, just as monopolies and unethical and illegal, and trading state security secrets for profit is unethical and illegal.
However, free-traitors want no restrictions on profits, so traitorism and murder are apt synonyms for free-traitorism.
546 posted on
04/12/2004 5:18:13 PM PDT by
XBob
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson