You are reading items in Scruples. You come across a new item. You note
that there are several responses to this item already, and all of the
responses seem to be from high-handed, right-wing, morality-bent
hypocrites.  You, on the other hand, know that, if you were in the same
situation, you wouldn't do what was necessarily "the right thing", at
least not by the blind, zealous standards of the other conferencers.

Do you respond to the item truthfully?

35 responses total.

Yes, I would.  To respond otherwise would be a sin; something that should
never be tollerated. ;)

I think it is offensive to right-wingers to suggest that they might
be hypocrites.  :)

If the topic of the item was abortion, gun control, or some other
subject that's been done to death, I probably wouldn't respond at
all, figuring it's a waste of my time.  But if it's something new
that I happen to know something about then yes, I'd respond
truthfully.

 This must not be the Grex version of Scruples, unless you mean
"left-wing"!  In any case -- if I could think quickly enough, I
would enter a truthful answer or apropos comment.  If I couldn't,
and it didn't seem to matter, you'd never hear from me.  If my
conscience bothered me & some words came together in my mind, I 
would probably come back to enter a response the next day or whenever.

 why not respond? I certainly believe in expressing my opinion, usually
a very radically moral answer, but I don't hold any reservations about
not fitting in. I haven't fit in since 2nd grade and I'm certainly not
going to start fitting in now.

Since it is so much more politically correct to take issue with
something perceived as "right-wing" or "morally high-handed", it
would be easier to respond to that than something that is more
popular but equally high-handed.  Since I usually hold opinions
that are moderate-to-conservative, I feel fine about differing with
"right-wing" opinions since I wouldn't feel tempted to get
hysterical.  But I feel more intimidated when it's implied that I'm
not taking sufficient care of the environment, for instance.

I would definitely respond.  I see no reason why not to...

No!  I wouldn't!  I disagree with all of you!  I'd lie about it!!!!

ha!  only sara passes, all the rest of you fail!  :)

 hey, I'm tellin' the truth. You can ask anyone associated with me if 
I have a history of conforming to the norm. (I don't. I swim in my

I'd respond, and I'd say exactly what i mean.  I generally don't give a flying
fig if anyone likes my opinions or not.  they're mine, and I have the  right to
articulate them.

There have been times when I've read an item in this conference and thought,
"That wouldn't be a fun decision at all.  I don't want to make it!", and
so not responded.  Sometimes that's because I am afraid that what I would
do in the situation in question would be something I wasn't particulary
proud of.  In that situation, I'm not anxious to display my weakness to
everyone.  I thought about not responding to this item, in fact.  Too
late now!

you could have killed your response.   still, glad you didn't.
i feel tyhe same way some times.

(I'm really not surprised that sometimes users will come across a topic in
this conference that they will feel uncomfortable answering, esp. if it's
because they'd do something that they're not particularly proud of. I
personally have more respect for the person who is honest about what
they'd do than the one who spouts a stock puritanical response.)

(not that I think anyone is lying about what they'd actually do or
anything like that...)

Maybe to some of us, that isn't a "stock puritanical response"
but a truthful description of what we would do in most cases.

yes, saying i'd do something i'm not proud of is hard.  still, i've tried
to be truthful so far...

(I agree, but at times I wonder...)

(Seriously, I've been asked why I can't find anyone of low morality to
buzz by here. I think I'll do some fiddling with the rc to make it less
intimidating, which strongly expressed opinions can be at times.)

(I'll also have to see if I can come up with some scenarios where the
right thing isn't necessarily the best thing to do, so to speak.)

(#15 slipped in.)

"Best" how?

re 10:  figs don't fly.  And you definitely can't give them to anyone.  

I usually try to do the right thing, but sometimes "right" is so vague
and not really necessary that it is more work than it would be worth 
to come up with words to express myself.  I feel this way often, but 
when I do, it's mostly laziness.  I have no fear of public opinion.  Just
look at my hair!

Whenever I look at your hair, Greg, I expect you to whip out a Samuri
sword.

no, he's sumo!! not samuri!!

FWIW, in matters relating to observing posted speed limits, the general
level of morality here seems to be extremely low ...  

Yes, the speed limits are not often taken seriously.  This may be because I,
personally, trust myself to drive at a speed which is safe under any and all
conditions.  But I don't think that the state of Michigan knows what speed
I'm safe at.  

And yes, I'm much closer to sumo than to samurai, unfortunately.  And I'd be
much more likely to whip out a throwing knife than a Katana.

Sumo.  Right.  My mistake.

re #23 -- we consider that in controlling our driving speed we are
our own best judges (& executioners, if we judge badly & collide
with a tree or something at highway speeds) so we (myself excluded)
feel free to take little notice of the posted speed limits.  
        "This business of parking on bends, now, he
wouldn't have it. A dashed sight more dangerous than fast driving
by a man who knew how to drive.  The police liked to be fair; it
was the magistrates who were obsessed by miles per hour.  All corners
should be approached dead slow -- all right, because there might be
some fool sitting in the middle of the road; but equally, nobody
should sit in the middle of the road, because there might be some
fool coming around the corner.  The thing was fifty-fifty, and the
blame should be distributed fifty-fifty; that was only just."
(set drift=off)

(sounds like more of the "government has NO RIGHT to interfere with what I
do with MY body"-type argument.)

This response has been erased.

As far as sayin my mind I always do that and that includes RL ask anyone 
who knows me.

        I'm brand-new to the Scruples conference and have been sifting
through the accumulated wisdom noted here for the past few hours.
What struck me most was how seriously people took the ethical problems
presented to them -- at least the vast majority of conferencers.
        It seems to me that Scruples shouldn't be approached so somberly.
It seems to me obvious, in many cases, what the "right answer" is. But
is that really the point? Isn't what makes Scruples fun precisely the
fact that we are (hopefully) confronted with two or more options and 
are tickled, in a way, by the attractiveness of the *wrong* answers?
        Some conferencers need to sit back and relax and remember that
their answers aren't going to be checked off as correct or incorrect.
In short, let's follow carson et al's example and HAVE FUN!

(actually, I'm a "right answer" sort of feller myself...)

 I sense a change in the drift current... 
re #4: I haven't fit in since Kindergarten!

Respond truthfully

I would probably come across a conf named scruples, that was long dead, and
go through each item, and give as rediculous a response as I could just to
see if anyone noticed. And I'd probably misspell ridiculous once or twice.

This response has been erased.

And I'd probably make at least one bored bbser laugh.

Response not possible - You must register and login before posting.

- Backtalk version 1.3.30 - Copyright 1996-2006, Jan Wolter and Steve Weiss