|
Grex > Commnets > #8: Ethical Standards - time for basic rules? | |
|
| Author |
Message |
adbarr
|
|
Ethical Standards - time for basic rules?
| 
Feb 8 20:13 UTC 1997 |
Do we need ethical standards for Community Networks?
How "should" community networks relate to the public, other related efforts,
and the people they serve?
|
| 11 responses total. |
adbarr
|
|
response 1 of 11:
|
Feb 8 20:22 UTC 1997 |
All community networking projects have interests. Ann Arbor has several
efforts in process. Can we define the interests of the various componets and
develop ethical precepts for discussion and eventual agreement? Do we care?
At what level do we operate with respect to our, and the whole, constituency?
Grex has an advanced set of ethics (but, of course, it is not codified fully)
much in the way of England's unwritten constitution. This is a logical place
to start the discussion, I say.
|
adbarr
|
|
response 2 of 11:
|
Feb 28 02:47 UTC 1997 |
What are the various standards of ethical conduct you expect to meet in your
journey? Business? Medicine? Religious? Journalisim? Teaching? Politics?
On-line communities? Is there a standard for all? Rcurl, help me here.
|
adbarr
|
|
response 3 of 11:
|
Feb 28 02:50 UTC 1997 |
Mary, srw, popcorn, janc, scg, and all?
And all?
|
mary
|
|
response 4 of 11:
|
Feb 28 16:19 UTC 1997 |
There simply isn't one standard to ethical conduct, not on this earth, not
in this country, not in any business, not even in a single family. Ethics
vary with people and standards vary with daily life. Part of the joy of
living is exploring our differences and examining how our personal ethics
change to meet the needs of the moment.
There was an article is the Free Press last week talking about some recent
research which shows how Blacks are wary of following medical advice to
discontinue futile medical treatment because they distrust White medical
personnel. The study found Blacks feel that racism plays into their
medical care.
I would bet most White folks reading that article would tend to think
Blacks are exaggerating their fear of Whites and displaying paranoia. I
mean, hospitals don't allow discrimination based on color, right? We have
clearly stated standards of ethical behavior (and laws) which address
this. But institutions are made up of individuals and a racist doesn't
tend to grow morals while putting on a white coat. So there you have what
(most Whites) would consider an ethical standard, mandated by law,
dictated by policy, backed up by the behavior of most health care
practitioners, yet whole big chunks of our society are disbelievers.
So, you can see why setting ethical standards for something
like a bbs might be a bit tough. I'm not sure that addressed
your question but it was the best I could do on demand. ;-)
|
rcurl
|
|
response 5 of 11:
|
Feb 28 17:14 UTC 1997 |
What Mary said - and said very well. I can't help much further - my skills
are in formulating and implementing "rules" (policies). I prefer that they
all be ethical, but that is a content question, not one of procedures and
rules. The potential *content* derives from a vast array of thought and
implementations. Almost all standards of ethical conduct are derived from
existing standards that the formulators want to maintain. So the
departure point is, existing standards of ethical conduct for on-line
communities. They shouldn't be too hard to find.
|
adbarr
|
|
response 6 of 11:
|
Mar 1 00:42 UTC 1997 |
Ok. Very thought-provoking. Now, are ethics dictated or (weasle word)
influenced by context? Should they be? Why? 100 points. Thanks, Mary and Rane
for the ideas. *Weasle is really weasel. Sorry, you little mammal preadator.*
I realize this conflicts with Mary's statements above. I question whether
"ethics" can be randomized to meet new situations. If ethics are flexible,
how can we determine whether a given value is ethical, beyond the present
moment? Or does it not matter?
|
remmers
|
|
response 7 of 11:
|
Mar 1 14:40 UTC 1997 |
[Quick! Somebody link this to the philosophy conference!]
|
adbarr
|
|
response 8 of 11:
|
Mar 2 02:32 UTC 1997 |
Why do you think this should be linked? It is a real-time event - an every
day experience -- philosophy -- ? huh? How on earth could that be relevant?
Huh? Huh? No way, man! [John is so cool! and Mary is so . . .!]
|
mary
|
|
response 9 of 11:
|
Mar 2 02:42 UTC 1997 |
And Arnold needs to get out more. ;-)
|
adbarr
|
|
response 10 of 11:
|
Mar 2 09:25 UTC 1997 |
I try to get out, but they won't let me have a key.
The bill just keeps increasing and I try to pay, but they say the "state" is
paying. What is that? Need more credit, I guess.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 11 of 11:
|
Mar 3 21:01 UTC 1997 |
Are you asking, from what do ethics derive? Ethics derive from human
experience and the resulting conclusions that contribute to an orderly
society. That is not always a *nice* society. Our's is a generally humane
orderly society, partly founded in the "golden rule", which has been found
from experience to contribute to one form of orderly society. However
there are orderly societies like that of the Aztecs, which was ethical in
their framework. Human sacrifice was an ethical component apparently
willingly accepted by most citizens, as necessary for their orderly
society. One difference, though, between "the golden rule" and human
sacrifice as ethical components is that the latter is more easily twisted
to an unethical practice, contributing then to societal disorder.
|