2 ms·

> In the long term In the long term the world would be better off if companies that are doing bad things get negative consequences. So that is good, not bad.

by stale2002 6y ago

> In the long term In the long term the world would be better off if companies that are doing bad things get negative consequences. So that is good, not bad. If more people punished bad actors, it would be better. > fewer and fewer people will want to do business More people causing negative consequences to bad companies is a good thing though! > Each of us gets to choose what we are And everyone choosing to cause damage to bad actors is a good thing. You choose to let them get away with bad actions, and the other people who actually want to make the world a better place choose to correctly cause consequences on bad actors. The "animals" are the people who stand by and do nothing against bad actors.

WalterBright 6y ago
A father and his son were strolling down the street one day, and as they passed a woman the father tipped his hat to her. His son says, "father, why did you tip your hat to her? She's no lady, she's the town prostitute." His father says, "son, you're right. She is no lady. But I'm a gentleman." > You choose to let them get away with bad actions Nope. I said line it out. > More people causing negative consequences to bad companies is a good thing though! Behaving unethically makes you just as bad.
- stale2002 6y ago
  Prositutes don't deserve bad things to happen to them. Companies that screw over employees do though. A better example would be tipping your hat to an assaulter, who mugs people. I would not respect someone who attacks others with physical violence. > Nope. I said line it out. And then they refuse to hire you, and hire someone else. That makes it pretty likely that they would get away with it, and screw over a different employee. > Behaving unethically makes you just as bad. Lets say you live in a medieval village, where there is a racist law that makes it legal for people to steal from or assault others, if they are of a certain race. So if you see a thief, currently mugging or attacking someone, then you would be just as bad as the thief if you engaged in self defense to stop them then? Because violence is bad? You would not only refuse to defend someone else from the thief, you would tip your hat to the assaulter! No. I a not going to respect the attacker. Yeah no. Defending others against a thief is a good thing, not a bad thing, even if we live in some world where the attacker is not engaging in any illegal actions.
  - WalterBright 6y ago
    > Prositutes don't deserve bad things to happen to them. Again, it's not about the prostitute or what they deserve. It's about YOU. You want to be a good guy with that clause? Line the clause out. Agreeing to something with your fingers crossed behind your back is dishonest and cowardly.
    - stale2002 6y ago
      > or what they deserve. It's about YOU. So then if a mugger is attacking someone, you think that we should tip our hat at the mugger, and walk by? No. I think that I should stop them from attacking others, and I am not going to respect the attacker, even if I lived in a society where it was legal for a mugger to attack others. Even though violence is "wrong" in general, it is not wrong to use violence to defend others who are being attacked by a mugger. > You want to be a good guy with that clause? Line the clause out. Thats like saying that if you are being attacked by a mugger, you should just run away, even if you think that mugger is going to hurt someone else in the future. No. The good thing to do is to take actions to stop the mugger from attacking you as well as other people, even if we live in some weird society where it is legal to assault others. > Agreeing to something with your fingers crossed behind your back is dishonest and cowardly. Using violence against others is normally a bad thing, but it is a good thing to do it in order to protect others. The same thing applies to the original situation.
      - loco5niner 6y ago
        >So then if a mugger is attacking someone, you think that we should tip our hat at the mugger, and walk by? Do you not see that the symbolism you are building here correlates with you joining the mugger in their current actions (mugging), then possibly somewhere down the road betraying the mugger? How does that make you better than them? I feel like you are trying to justify a selfish decision.
        stale2002 6y ago
        You completely ignored my question. (edit: didn't realize you were a different person actually, but my point still stands) Have you now backed off completely on your point about tipping hats to people? Because previously you started saying how we should respect everyone. Do you now agree that we should not do that, to muggers, for example, and that it is totally OK to go back on your word against someone trying to attack you? * An example of how someone might betray a mugger, would be if you promise them that you will go home and get them money, if they let you keep your phone, and then you "betray" them by going back on your word, and escaping instead. (Lets assume you can get away with this easily in this hypothetical, and that mugging isn't illegal, lol) * Whether or not someone's actions help the company/mugger engage in bad actions is a separate discussion. It is a completely different argument to say "You should not betray your word to a company giving you an immoral contract" as compared to your new argument of "You should not work for companies that give non-competes, because non-competes are evil". Previously, you were making it seem like the evil act here, is betraying the company. And now you are switching it up and saying that the evil act is working for the company at all. So, once again, do you now agree with me that we should not respect everyone, such as muggers, and that it is not immoral to betray, for example, muggers?

WalterBright 6y ago

A father and his son were strolling down the street one day, and as they passed a woman the father tipped his hat to her. His son says, "father, why did you tip your hat to her? She's no lady, she's the town prostitute." His father says, "son, you're right. She is no lady. But I'm a gentleman." > You choose to let them get away with bad actions Nope. I said line it out. > More people causing negative consequences to bad companies is a good thing though! Behaving unethically makes you just as bad.

stale2002 6y ago
Prositutes don't deserve bad things to happen to them. Companies that screw over employees do though. A better example would be tipping your hat to an assaulter, who mugs people. I would not respect someone who attacks others with physical violence. > Nope. I said line it out. And then they refuse to hire you, and hire someone else. That makes it pretty likely that they would get away with it, and screw over a different employee. > Behaving unethically makes you just as bad. Lets say you live in a medieval village, where there is a racist law that makes it legal for people to steal from or assault others, if they are of a certain race. So if you see a thief, currently mugging or attacking someone, then you would be just as bad as the thief if you engaged in self defense to stop them then? Because violence is bad? You would not only refuse to defend someone else from the thief, you would tip your hat to the assaulter! No. I a not going to respect the attacker. Yeah no. Defending others against a thief is a good thing, not a bad thing, even if we live in some world where the attacker is not engaging in any illegal actions.
- WalterBright 6y ago
  > Prositutes don't deserve bad things to happen to them. Again, it's not about the prostitute or what they deserve. It's about YOU. You want to be a good guy with that clause? Line the clause out. Agreeing to something with your fingers crossed behind your back is dishonest and cowardly.
  - stale2002 6y ago
    > or what they deserve. It's about YOU. So then if a mugger is attacking someone, you think that we should tip our hat at the mugger, and walk by? No. I think that I should stop them from attacking others, and I am not going to respect the attacker, even if I lived in a society where it was legal for a mugger to attack others. Even though violence is "wrong" in general, it is not wrong to use violence to defend others who are being attacked by a mugger. > You want to be a good guy with that clause? Line the clause out. Thats like saying that if you are being attacked by a mugger, you should just run away, even if you think that mugger is going to hurt someone else in the future. No. The good thing to do is to take actions to stop the mugger from attacking you as well as other people, even if we live in some weird society where it is legal to assault others. > Agreeing to something with your fingers crossed behind your back is dishonest and cowardly. Using violence against others is normally a bad thing, but it is a good thing to do it in order to protect others. The same thing applies to the original situation.
    - loco5niner 6y ago
      >So then if a mugger is attacking someone, you think that we should tip our hat at the mugger, and walk by? Do you not see that the symbolism you are building here correlates with you joining the mugger in their current actions (mugging), then possibly somewhere down the road betraying the mugger? How does that make you better than them? I feel like you are trying to justify a selfish decision.
      - stale2002 6y ago
        You completely ignored my question. (edit: didn't realize you were a different person actually, but my point still stands) Have you now backed off completely on your point about tipping hats to people? Because previously you started saying how we should respect everyone. Do you now agree that we should not do that, to muggers, for example, and that it is totally OK to go back on your word against someone trying to attack you? * An example of how someone might betray a mugger, would be if you promise them that you will go home and get them money, if they let you keep your phone, and then you "betray" them by going back on your word, and escaping instead. (Lets assume you can get away with this easily in this hypothetical, and that mugging isn't illegal, lol) * Whether or not someone's actions help the company/mugger engage in bad actions is a separate discussion. It is a completely different argument to say "You should not betray your word to a company giving you an immoral contract" as compared to your new argument of "You should not work for companies that give non-competes, because non-competes are evil". Previously, you were making it seem like the evil act here, is betraying the company. And now you are switching it up and saying that the evil act is working for the company at all. So, once again, do you now agree with me that we should not respect everyone, such as muggers, and that it is not immoral to betray, for example, muggers?