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: Ilaine who wrote (24960)	7/24/2006 11:57:30 AM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 542019

Not with things that involve other human beings engaged in complex activities. I respectfully disagree. I, staff, and colleagues did it for years. You are paid to be an advocate. I've been paid sometimes to be an advocate, sometimes to be objective. Some of us can do one or the other or both or neither, and sometimes but not others. I'm not allowed to be in a situation where my personal interests conflict with those of my clients Of course not. That's a key point. Most people can't be objective in every situation. You don't expect objectivity where there is conflict of interest. So step one is getting someone with no conflict of interest. And you need people who are trained and disciplined and self-knowing. More than one of them working collaboratively. And then they have to have an incentive to try. Plus a feedback mechanism. If those conditions are met, you can get pretty darn close to objective. I am certain of that. Juries can't be expected to be objective. Media can be, if they want to badly enough. In your former profession, you were prohibited from receiving even coffee and donuts from a vendor, although perhaps that rule wasn't enforced. Unfortunately it was. Except for one scenario of a boss who was a contractor whore, I job I got out of as quickly and gracefully as possible.