From lojbab@lojban.org Sat Apr 20 12:36:03 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: lojbab@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_0_3_1); 20 Apr 2002 19:36:03 -0000 Received: (qmail 26498 invoked from network); 20 Apr 2002 19:36:03 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.218) by m2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 20 Apr 2002 19:36:03 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO chain.digitalkingdom.org) (216.231.54.78) by mta3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 20 Apr 2002 19:36:03 -0000 Received: from [205.252.61.3] (helo=bob.lojban.org) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 16z0f8-00055K-00 for ; Sat, 20 Apr 2002 12:36:46 -0700 Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.0.20020420152618.00aa4600@digitalkingdom.org> X-Sender: lojbab@digitalkingdom.org (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Sat, 20 Apr 2002 15:36:36 -0400 To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] where the mailing lists lie In-Reply-To: References: <5.1.0.14.0.20020419173804.04b5eec0@digitalkingdom.org> <5.1.0.14.0.20020418222728.049dde70@digitalkingdom.org> <5.1.0.14.0.20020419173804.04b5eec0@digitalkingdom.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed From: lojbab X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=1120595 X-Yahoo-Profile: lojbab X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 14075 At 01:21 PM 4/20/02 +0000, Robert J. Chassell wrote: >lojbab@lojban.org wrote: > They can't sell what you don't give them. (Hint: they have no way > to verify the truth of anything you enter into their data fields, > other than your email address. .... > >As a matter of good governance, a country should never encourage >decent people to lie. That is fine, if "governance" is the issue. The net is a bastion of freedom from government, and many of the same people who argue most strongly for the freedom of the net also are quick to take advantage of that freedom for profit. I don't see any solution that does not impinge on freedom in some way. >The social arrangements should encourage honesty. There will always be people who will take advantage of the honesty of others, which thus may discourage honesty. > (Note that `white lies' and other such diplomatic remarks >are quite different from making direct claims that are false. Also, >you should never have to deal with a business as if it were like a >friend wearing mismatched socks.) "Should" is a moral question. Corporations in a free market tend to be amoral, other than in terms of what produces a better bottom line. Most net-based companies are in bad shape, in terms of the bottom line, and being moral (as opposed to merely legal) may mean being bankrupt. >Indeed, a country should arrange matters such that acting in an honest >manner is without doubt the best action. That means more government interference, something I never thought I would hear you advocate %^) lojbab