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.

Politics : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TigerPaw who wrote (5242)	11/13/2005 9:29:44 AM
From: epicure	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 542599

I agree- but for me that is much less important than the issue of not doing it again, though accountability may be inextricably bound up in preventing it from happening again, I guess.

To: TigerPaw who wrote (5242)	11/13/2005 10:13:45 AM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 542599

It is also important to hold those responsible to be accountable. As a practical matter, it's often impossible to both fix the problem and get "accountability" and you have to choose. Having done lots of studies of these sorts of things, I know that people will hide things if they feel that they will be blamed. Only if they believe that they will survive the incident will they share what is needed to fix the problem going forward. If you want to affix blame, you can go in hard and maybe get the key information to fix the problem but there's the risk that you won't. If you go in soft, you have an excellent chance of fixing the problem but you don't get to hang anyone. IMO, fixing the problem always takes precedence over retribution.