Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Dayuhan who wrote (82313)	6/20/2000 6:46:00 PM
From: The Philosopher	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 108807

If you're saying what I think you are, it's no help. What is the use of saying we know what fairness is but can't agree on whether a given thing is fair or not? I think that violates the main aspect of fairness. Is it meaningful for us to say "yes, we agree on what fairness is but you think situation X is fair and I think situation X is unfair"? I submit that if that is the case, we DON'T agreeon what fairness is, but rather have different definitions of it.

To: Dayuhan who wrote (82313)	6/20/2000 7:24:00 PM
From: Ilaine	Respond to of 108807

I agree with you that fairness means considering and balancing the competing interests in a limited resource. If two people want to fight over a stretch of sand to lay their towel on a deserted public beach, we'd think they were nuts. If two people wanted to fight over which one of them got a parking place in the parking lot of a crowded mall on Christmas Eve, we'd understand. We do resolve the interests by rules, but usually they are rules of thumb, IMO. The balancing process is so idiosyncratic and ad hoc we can't have laws for this.