MetaTalk posts tagged with ethics

Haha! Let's make things worse.

allkindsoftime — Thu, 31 Jul 2008 10:43:14 -0800

"This is a really excellent question"? Seriously? This question, while probably not dabbling in the illegal (yet), is completely unethical and a very poor use of Metafilter. Speaking as someone who has been to Zimbabwe and has friends there suffering from the hyperinflation and complete mismanagement of the country and systematic destruction of society there, I find this an incredibly crude, joking response to the issues there. Worse, however, the responses to the question are encouraging the OP to carry out his inane scheme. Allow me to elaborate on why that perpetuates the cycle: Nobody in Zimbabwe wants or really for that matter realistically trades in Zim dollars anymore, as they are for all intents and purposes useless. The only thing they are any good for is exactly what the poster is trying to manipulate - they are actually facing a shortage of the physical dollars there because they've become a collector's item on ebay. A hundred billion Zim dollars, not considering the recently announced (and completely impotent) "revaluation" of the currency, isn't even enough to buy a loaf of bread in Zim, because 100 bil won't even get $1 USD on the black market there at this point. You want to know who's selling those $100 bil notes online, though? I'll give you a hint, its not the people who have issues getting a loaf of bread there. (But the article I linked said that's exactly what 100 bil is worth? The article was published one week ago. That's the rate at which the currency is plummeting.) People who have internet access are those who are strategically positioned within the country to benefit from the suffering of millions of their countrymen. Whether its white Afrikaaners profiteering off of the black market for oil or food, or black government officials and their friends and family, the vast majority of people that still have access to things like running water and electricity at this point (and thus the internet, and thus ebay), are people who are complicit in the continued downward spiral, for personal gain. I might point out that these are the same people who either directly or indirectly support Mugabe's banning of NGO efforts (which, strangely, no one's talking about very much) to stem the tide of hunger and disease in his country because he still thinks he can somehow hide from the world what he's doing to his country. The shelves of the grocery stores in Zim are empty. There's no gas at the gas stations. I know because I've seen them. Helping this poster carry out his funny little joke is tantamount to contributing to the suffering of the people literally starving to death in Zimbabwe. I would have hoped to see a question on "What can I do to help Zimbabweans?" but instead I'm looking at the exact opposite. This question makes me sick.

We need to talk about this...

anotherpanacea — Sun, 13 Jan 2008 10:48:54 -0800

During the GiveWell hubbub, some commenters become obsessed with outing a pseudonymous troll calling itself "Rachel Tension." We need to talk about the ethics of outing, unmasking, and breaking anonymity. Rachel Tension was linked, apparently erroneously, to "a junior academic with an interest in race," and that person received a threatening e-mail. One of our own, Catch, posed on GiftHub as the pseudonym Persona E Person, further fanning the flames of speculation. Some of the energy devoted to exposing GiveWell's fraud was siphoned off into the efforts to punish the person who told us to "Go f*ck yourself. I wipe my *ss with Metafilter. You mistake an incited mob for a community." The pursuit of truth and justice got diverted into a quest for vengeance. Look: it's okay to out self-linkers, but not okay to out people who insult you. Phil Cubeta has asked why MetaFilter hasn't responded to his requests for a larger discussion of this, and I think it's because most of us would rather prosecute interlopers like Holden Karnofsky than long-time members who muck about on other websites. I'm not sure that's good enough. There are (at least) two options: 1. Membership here isn't contingent on your behavior in the real world or elsewhere on the internet. Do what you like outside, just leave the roughhousing out of your Metafilter contributions. (cortex wrote: "But in general, what people do offsite is not something that translates cleanly to administrative action onsite; I don't hold any sway over how people choose to conduct themselves, nor do I want to presume that kind of influence. ") 2. The metaphorical pitchforks and torches we grab for flameouts in MetaTalk are wildly inappropriate in the wider internet. It's extremely stupid to turn community policing into inter-site warfare, and it makes us all look bad. If you do it, the moderators will suspend or ban you, just as they would if you outed a member of the metafilter to the wider world. (cf. the recent mefimail outings, etc.) (cortex also wrote: "If someone's offsite behavior is so bad, or implicates metafilter badly, it may be something that'll lead to onsite consequences, but I can't remember the last time anything like that happened, and (again, barring some clearer-cut explanation of the Rachel situation) I'm not clear that it did here, either.") I think this conversation should be happening here, at the site of the transgression, rather than at the site that we transgressed against.

Quick Survey on MeFi Ethical Question

WCityMike — Wed, 25 Apr 2007 14:41:36 -0800

If an admin deleted an Ask MeFi question at the poster's request, what ethical implications are associated with blogging about it, if you saw the thread prior to its deletion and feel you have something to say? And what rationale do you use to form that opinion?

Wish there was a follow-up on this one ...

WCityMike — Wed, 28 Mar 2007 14:15:56 -0800

Wish we had a follow-up on this thread — guy sounded like a psycho (as you might imagine from my response). The user apparently hasn't posted since then.

Can we please assume that AskMe questioners are honest?

Mr. President Dr. Steve Elvis America — Sun, 04 Feb 2007 14:16:12 -0800

Instead of assuming that most AskMe users are cheats, let's assume they're honest.

AskMe is cool, gets professional responses

Saucy Intruder — Mon, 25 Sep 2006 12:32:37 -0800

Sometimes AskMe takes you in a surprising direction, and this thread is one of those times: a college student asks if he should take advantage of a contraband answer key to check his graded homework, and the community is nearly unanimous in its ethical condemnation of the practice. That is, until a philosophy professor and professional ethicist answers to the contrary. Probably not sidebar-worthy, but a neat example of how an issue that seems at first to be black-and-white bleeds a little gray once the experts join the fray.

So we can't even discuss unethical stuff now...?

GleepGlop — Fri, 03 Mar 2006 16:35:29 -0800

I just asked a question about 'how to succeed in university' that was open to standard ideas and ideas that were not kosher (cheating. happens every day). Im busy, i wont be participating actively in this discussion, but the question i put forward is: how is discussing cheating methods different from a thread discussing file sharing or something. Nothing illegal is happening by discussing this stuff. Whats the deal. Thats like deleting a thread that asks 'How do jewel thiefs go about cracking safes?' Are we going to delete the thread because we dont want this suspected jewel thief cracking our safes, or is our curiosity going to get peaked and we're going to discuss it like a bunch of nerds who are into this nerdy stuff? The latter? OK.

AskMe deletion

God — Mon, 26 Dec 2005 23:47:11 -0800

My Askme question, about a DVD that was burned on a PC that wouldn't work on my Mac, was deleted for no other seeming reason than that it mentioned P2P. [More inside]

MeFites agree, don't report your boyfriend to HR.

oddman — Tue, 13 Dec 2005 10:02:08 -0800

Almost unbelievable. It is hard to believe, but we have an issue on which just about all mefites agree.

How can I steal my friend's apartment?

furtive — Mon, 12 Dec 2005 03:46:59 -0800

Dear ask.mefi, how can I fuck over my friend while he's overseas by stealing his apartment so that he doesn't have a place to live when he gets back. P.S. It IS a really nice apartment, and he IS a jerk for having let me live there while he's gone so I'm totally justified in my actions.

I am not a lawyer but here is my advice....

footnote — Mon, 15 Aug 2005 19:46:24 -0800

This thread has me wondering: when does discussing the law on a forum like AskMe cross over to giving legal advice? Obviously, any lawyer's first answer is going to be "talk to a lawyer." But then what? (A very similar professional ethics problem for doctors has been discussed here before.) My legal ethics class was fantastic, but we talked more about Enron than the internet.

Followup on the ethics of wireless leeching

ori — Sat, 09 Jul 2005 16:18:04 -0800

As an update to this and other questions on the ethics and legality of using other people's wireless: Police in St. Petersburg, Florida have "arrested a man for using someone else's wireless Internet network in one of the first criminal cases involving this fairly common practice." (link, via)

Would this link be against self-link etiquette or policy?

bigbadem — Mon, 11 Apr 2005 10:24:03 -0800

I wanted to create an FPP for this ten second film festival, which I think would be of interest to many MeFites, but I've run into a couple of ethical and logistical conundrums: 1) The festival is being run by a friend of mine, so I suppose I might be a little biased as to this being The Best of The Web. 2) You really have to be in the Twin Cities area to see the screening and win a prize, even though submissions are accepted from anywhere. Any thoughts about this being FPP worthy?

Is this ethical and/or legal?

Plutor — Fri, 01 Apr 2005 04:57:46 -0800

I have prepared an FPP about an organization that was recently the subject of a couple Internet memes (and Metafilter threads) that is now being sued by a major international corporation as a result of one of their pranks. Their web site is vague and asks people not to post rumors, but they sent out a number of details to their mailing list, including ways to support them. Would it be unethical for me to post this semi-private information to Metafilter? Could I get them in more trouble with this lawsuit? Half of me feels that Mefites might be willing to contribute to the cause, but the other half wants to be extremely careful.

Is it unethical to use Ask Metafilter to answer your employer's questions?

milovoo — Wed, 24 Mar 2004 15:49:07 -0800

Without getting specific, does it not seem unethical to use Ask Metafilter to answer your employer's questions?
Is this acceptable, or what is the limit? (or maybe we need to implement some sort of "I'll answer for a percentage"
scheme - since you are getting paid to know the answer)

ethically questionable mapping link; i am sorry

oissubke — Sun, 02 Feb 2003 21:39:26 -0800

I recently posted a link, and in it I happened to slip a 1x1 px graphic that is used by this site to create a map of internet users. Seemed harmless enough, but in retrospect I regret having done it. It was an action of questionable ethics, and I should have avoided it. Please nix my post and accept my apologies.

"When does a thread cross the line...?"

Bag Man — Wed, 16 Oct 2002 12:01:37 -0800

Threads should be bias and threads should be made to provoke thought. However when does a thread cross the line of appropriate and thought provoking into the realm of insults and claptrap? What about this one or this one (self-post)? Should the inmates do the policing? If so, how can it policed? If a weblog is a form "journalism" should there be some sort of code of ethics? Or guidelines for objectivity?

Why do people engage in Google-bombing?

Irontom — Wed, 15 May 2002 09:47:30 -0800

Why do people feel so thoroughly justified about engaging in Google bombing?

Why is your opinion about something so important as to justify monkeywrenching the best search engine (if not the best thing) on the net? Why is your self-righteous indignation more important that leaving well enough alone?

If it is so important to you, why don't you build something equivalent with the specific aim of "educating the people" and stop piggybacking off of Google?

I am interested in Matt's opinion on this, since he's one of the ones that set this whole thing off.

NYT registration generator

mr_crash_davis — Wed, 24 Apr 2002 19:05:30 -0800

Tired of using mefi/mefi to log into the New York Times?

Now you don't have to.

'Blogging Code of Ethics'

RobertLoch — Thu, 11 Apr 2002 10:44:02 -0800

John Hiler has written a good piece discussing blogging and journalism. At the conclusion he outlines a ' Blogging Code of Ethics' which I think is meant to be a work in progress. Whilst I understand his point, surely there are only a very few weblog that actually have the level of impact and/or respect, for such a thing to be relevent? I don't know, is a 'Blogging Code of Ethics' really necessary? If you think it is, is there anything you would add/subtract from his list?

Not how we'd like others to see us, is it?

y2karl — Tue, 13 Nov 2001 11:20:30 -0800

Latest entry on the The Amos n Andy Episodes List? I think I'm with Malphigan on this. Talk about a poor reflection of MetaFilter to the larger world.