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.

Technology Stocks : Semi-Equips - Buy when BLOOD is running in the streets! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: chomolungma who wrote (10260)	3/5/2002 2:10:30 PM
From: Sun Tzu	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 10921

Read my other post for an explanation of where I stand on Enron and management responsibilities. As for the case that you are mentioning, there are 3 things that need to be considered before passing judgement. The first is the pattern of behavior. If the doctor you are talking about has a history of neglecting paper work, then perhaps he should not be allowed to take that on. If on the other hand this was a one time thing, then no structural remedy is necessary. The bottom line, no event has only one cause. Civil courts routinely assign percentages of responsibility to the damages caused. Secondly, the effect of the punishment should be to improve the society not to exact revenge. So what should be done with the doctor is not as simple as you make it sound. Third the rights of the victim should be protected. So let me turn the question around. Do you want to be living in a society that your doctor may forget to tell you life threatening info about your health and is just forgiven for being human? At the very least, those responsible should take part in repaying the damages caused. ST