Jim and David, Could we get Steve and Maria Stella to take this off-list?
It's *really* boring.
sb
-----Original Message-----
From: [log in to unmask]
[mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of Maria Stella
Sent: Friday, August 11, 2000 12:21 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Guilt by association - ethical? or just legal?
Steve
stop playing the sophist, PR hiring just stinks! Full Stop!
:)
MS
On Thu, 10 Aug 2000, Steve wrote:
> Soooo let me see, if innocence by association is wrong, guilt by
> association is okay?
>
> This is why I say look at each case independently of the others (unless
> there is good reason to connect the two--and hiring the same PR firm seems
> like a poor reason).
>
> Steve
>
>
>
> --- Maria Stella <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> > Please read my previous message, as we are talking about different
> > things (i don't remember exactly where i read what and i don't disagre
> > with the principle of what you say),
> > but anyway, why is it ALWAYS that company B is going to be 'screwed' by
> > 'zealots'? Is this the only option, or the most handy in order to accuse
> > environmentalists?
> > For example, hasn't it happened up to now that actually *real*
> > polluters with *bad* products have been covered BY INNOCENCE BY
> > ASSOCIATION *JUST* because they make money and look authoritative and
> > well groomed and therefore "become" (by association) reputable?
> > Maybe it is time to tell me all what you know about the semiotics of
> > 1) shaving
> > 2) a tie
> >
> > MS
> >
> >
> > On Wed, 9 Aug 2000, Steve wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > If company A hires BM and company A is trying to put up a good front
> > for
> > > something pretty crappy (say company A was doing some dumping).
> > >
> > > Now, company B hires BM and company B is getting slammed by irrational
> > > zealots who are making false claims about company B's product (that is
> > > company B's product *is* safe).
> > >
> > > So since guilt by association is okay now, company B is just as guilty
> > as
> > > company A. Guilty of what I don't have a fucking clue, but what the
> > hell
> > > they make money so screw 'em.
> > >
> > > Have I got it right Maria Stella?
> > >
> > > Steve
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --- Maria Stella <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Dear Chris,
> > > > I think what you wrote is irrelevant: (two dots Jim)
> > > > In the case of Burston-Marstellar X=Y.
> > > > Even a child understands the difference between actions made by the
> > same
> > > > body and actions made by different bodies that have a circumstantial
> > > > relationship that does NOT QUALIFY as true association. My statement
> > was
> > > > for the specific situation of ONE COMPANY, and not a general
> > statement,
> > > > I
> > > > am really at a loss why i have to waste my time on such an obvious
> > > > clarification.
> > > >
> > > > MS
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, 8 Aug 2000, Chris Perley wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > What's wrong with guilt by association????? Are you being
> > serious
> > > > Maria
> > > > > Stella? Let me think of an example. A hypothetical child
> > molester Y
> > > > is a
> > > > > male. X is associated with said child molester Y because either :
> > a.
> > > > X is a
> > > > > male - and/or b. X lives in the same street, and/or c. X went to
> > > > school with
> > > > > Y, and/or d. X looks like Y, e. and/or X shops at the same store
> > as Y
> > > > (a
> > > > > nice analogy to the point I made below). Therefore - by
> > association -
> > > > > someone claims/implies/suggest/hints that X is as bad as Y
> > > > > because......either a, b, c, d, e....etc.
> > > > >
> > > > > And yes, we are indeed talking about ethics!
> > > > >
> > > > > kindly
> > > > >
> > > > > Chris
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > From: Maria Stella [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> > > > > > Sent: Tuesday, 8 August 2000 10:45
> > > > > > To: Chris Perley
> > > > > > Cc: [log in to unmask]
> > > > > > Subject: RE: Burston Mastellar Largest PR firm
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > What's wrong with guilt by association? We are not talking about
> > > > law, but
> > > > > > about ethics. Read my proposed book and see (i insist).
> > > > > > Maria_Stella
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > =====
> > > "In a nutshell, he [Steve] is 100% unadulterated evil. I do not
> > believe in a 'Satan', but this man is as close to 'the real McCoy' as
> > they come."
> > > --Jamey Lee West
> > >
> > > __________________________________________________
> > > Do You Yahoo!?
> > > Kick off your party with Yahoo! Invites.
> > > http://invites.yahoo.com/
> > >
> >
>
>
> =====
> "In a nutshell, he [Steve] is 100% unadulterated evil. I do not believe in
a 'Satan', but this man is as close to 'the real McCoy' as they come."
> --Jamey Lee West
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Kick off your party with Yahoo! Invites.
> http://invites.yahoo.com/
>
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|