4 ms·
Or, we collectively decide that it’s unlikely scandals of this scope did not previously pass the CEO’s desk at some point in the timeline and start with penalti
by Mtinie 3y ago
Or, we collectively decide that it’s unlikely scandals of this scope did not previously pass the CEO’s desk at some point in the timeline and start with penalties at the top, and then move down the line.
My argument can be expanded to the fact that if a “rogue underling” did this without C-level input that leadership at the company is negligent at the least, or attempting to abstract responsibility and hide the issue behind deniability at the worst.
Addendum: I should have picked a better phrase to start with. I agree that the legal process is the correct way to proceed, but once a determination of culpability is made, hiding behind layers of leadership should not be the defacto norm.
- 0xDEADFED5 3y ago"collectively deciding" is a lynch mob. remembering the danger of such thinking seems more important every day.
- Mtinie 3y agoReally? That’s an interesting take and one that I hadn’t considered. I need to think about how I feel regarding the underlying premise but I can certainly see where you can make the argument. I agree that jumping to lynch mob reactions aren’t helpful. My original point—-which was likely not worded well—is that the humans which make up “society” need to reach a point where they can recognize that corporations make and follow-through on decisions because they are supported by sign-off from our fellow humans, not because of an abstract corporate mechanism. Thank you for the sidebar.
- lightedman 3y ago"'collectively deciding' is a lynch mob" Gee, what do you call a jury decision, then? A non-collective decision?