[earwicker7]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Orcin /img/forum/go_quote.gif I am CFO of a $500 million manufacturing company

Well, that goes a LONG way towards explaining your lack of ethics

.

 

[Larry I]

Orcin,

You are right, none of the examples you provide constitute stealing, nor would auditioning gear that one never intends to buy. There is no illegal activity involved. It should be clear, however, that a lot of us, myself included, find the practice unethical. Perhaps a minor transgression, but, still not a practice that treats other human beings the way they should be treated.

 

[Orcin]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yikes /img/forum/go_quote.gif I'm not surprised that you are a CFO.

Quote:

Originally Posted by earwicker7 /img/forum/go_quote.gif Well, that goes a LONG way towards explaining your lack of ethics .

I find this personally insulting and I don't think such a personal attack is warranted or necessary. You don't know anything about me, my career, or my personal ethics.

It's too bad that people can't have a philosophical discussion with differing opinions without it turning into a name-calling contest. Skylab and I managed to do it earlier in this thread. I'm sure he still doesn't agree with me, but he never questioned my personal morality... just my position on the issue at hand.

I have had enough of your uninformed and misguided interpretations of morality and ethics, and I'm done with this thread. Is that succinct enough for you?

 

[Yikes]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yikes I’m not surprised that you are a CFO

Quote:

Originally Posted by Orcin /img/forum/go_quote.gif I find this personally insulting and I don't think such a personal attack is warranted or necessary. You don't know anything about me, my career, or my personal ethics.

The fact that you find my comment that “I’m not surprised that you are a CFO” personally insulting is very interesting. You must think very little of CFO’s in general to find it so insulting. At one point the comment “I’m not surprised that you are a priest.” would have been a complement, now it would be taken as “I’m not surprised that you are a pedophile.” I’m curious; how did you interpret my comment that you found it “personally insulting”? Your being insulted by my comment says much more about your own self image than anything else you or I could have possibly said.

For all you know I could have meant: I’m not surprised that you are a CFO, you presented such a cogent and thought provoking argument that you could hardly be anything else but a CFO, I Salute you.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Orcin /img/forum/go_quote.gif I have had enough of your uninformed and misguided interpretations of morality and ethics, and I'm done with this thread. Is that succinct enough for you?

YES

 

[dvse]

Quote:

Originally Posted by earwicker7 /img/forum/go_quote.gif Well, I think I can pretty safely say you've never been a musician . Imagine whatever job you do. Now imagine not getting paid for it because someone else has a better "model" or whatever it is you're getting at. I have no love for the recording industry given the current state of music. But I have even less love for thieves who think they're entitled to free music at the expense of the people who put blood, sweat and tears into it... ie., the musicians. If you want free music, listen to the radio or the homeless guy on the corner who plays guitar. Don't "rip" or "burn" or whatever the **** it is you kids are calling it these days in order to convince yourself it isn't stealing.

This is all fine, but the reality is that it is impossible to police copyrights on the internet without total surveillance of all online activities either by the governments or private entities. Indeed, this is what RIAA/MPAA etc are lobbying for - do you think that once the infrastructure is in place it won't be abused (like DMCA already is)? It will be a huge blow to freedom of speech, all to protect the interests of 'big content'. Are you willing to sacrifice your liberty so that the world has more britney/mickey mouse?

It is the implications of enforcing copyright in its current form that make it undesirable, not any inherent 'morality' or lack thereof.

 

[dvse]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Orcin /img/forum/go_quote.gif I have had enough of your uninformed and misguided interpretations of morality and ethics, and I'm done with this thread. Is that succinct enough for you?

Unfortunately, the concept of marginal cost seems to elude the morality advocates in this thread. Is it unethical to go to a private gallery and not buy anything?

Once the demo equipment is set up and there is sales staff in the store, it actually costs NOTHING extra to offer a demo (unless there is a queue of potential buyers) - if there is no demo, the sales person will pretty much just sit there twiddling their thumbs while getting paid.

IF people demoing and not buying are a genuine problem, the correct response is to try to get money from the manufacturers for keeping demo sets or charging customers a fee. Crying 'stealing', 'thieves' etc just exposes one as a retrograde who is unable to cope with change and instead demands legal protection at a net cost to society.

 

[Orcin]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yikes /img/forum/go_quote.gif The fact that you find my comment that “I’m not surprised that you are a CFO” personally insulting is very interesting. You must think very little of CFO’s in general to find it so insulting. Your being insulted by my comment says much more about your own self image than anything else you or I could have possibly said. For all you know I could have meant: I’m not surprised that you are a CFO, you presented such a cogent and thought provoking argument that you could hardly be anything else but a CFO, I Salute you.

But that's not what you meant, and you know it. Go back and read the content of your post. It's pretty obvious what you meant. You called me unethical, and then said you were not surprised that I am a CFO.

Now you are trying to say that I am embarrassed by my own profession, and my low self-esteem caused me to misinterpret your praise as criticism? Nice try, but I think anyone reading your post would know what you meant.

It's apparent to me that you are embarrassed by your own stereotyping and you are trying to find some way out of the situation without looking like you were wrong to start slinging insults. It's not going to work. Either stand by your insensitive comments, or take them back, or quit posting about it.

 

[Mister Crash]

It's interesting to read about different people's perspectives on the morality of purchasing their equipment. On the one hand, if the dealers go away, there will be no place to audition equipment, and people in that community will have to adjust. On the other hand, the dealer's markup can be substantial, and by getting the equipment from a different source, the purchaser may be able to save (in some cases) thousands of dollars.

I'm interested to see how people from this community would interpret the following situations:

1. You listen to a pre-amplifier at a local dealer. It sounds really good, and you are convinced it is the right one for you. However, the salespeople are quite rude to you and act as though they have much better things to do than help you out. Turned off by this experience, you end up ordering the pre-amp online direct from the manufacturer.

2. You go to an audio dealer and listen to an amplifier that you've been fantasizing about for some time. It totally blows you away. However, you don't have the money to buy it right away. So, you start saving. Three months later, you still don't have quite enough money to buy this amp from the dealer. However, you find that an online dealer is selling a demo unit for a 30% discount. At this point, you do have enough money to buy the demo unit and you end up buying it.

3. A friend of yours was recently laid off. He's having some money troubles, and is seriously considering selling off all of his audio gear. You express an interest in his speakers, and come over to take a listen. They are in absolutely pristine condition and sound fantastic. However, the price he wants for these speakers would almost wipe out your savings. While browsing online, you come across a classified ad from someone else in the area who is selling the same speakers. These speakers are in relatively good condition, but do have some scratches on them, and this person is asking 20% less for the speakers than your friend is. You ask your friend is he is flexible on the price, and mention the ad that you saw, but he holds the price firm. You end up buying the speakers from the ad.

 

[dvse]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mister Crash /img/forum/go_quote.gif I'm interested to see how people from this community would interpret the following situations: <...>

All three seem perfectly reasonable. In the last one, it might have been unethical to offer 20% of the market price (ie 80% off), knowing he needs the money urgently, but asking for a relatively small discount seems quite okay.

 

[Larry I]

No problem with any of the three scenarios. The prospective customer actually intended to buy, but intervening circumstances changed the decision. The ethical questions arise where the "customer" really does not intend, from the start, to buy from the person who he "uses" for the purpose of helping decide on a purchase elsewhere.

 

[Yikes]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Orcin /img/forum/go_quote.gif But that's not what you meant, and you know it. Go back and read the content of your post. It's pretty obvious what you meant. You called me unethical, and then said you were not surprised that I am a CFO.

I never called you unethical, I said what you do or at least what you are defending is unethical or IMHO Stealing.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Orcin /img/forum/go_quote.gif Now you are trying to say that I am embarrassed by my own profession, and my low self-esteem caused me to misinterpret your praise as criticism? Nice try, but I think anyone reading your post would know what you meant.

I don't think you’re stupid, so I don't think that you believed my comment as praise. The fact remains that you took insult over the comment "I'm not surprised that you are a CFO." Would you be insulted if I had said; I'm not surprised that you are white, or maybe that you are an Audiophile? I did not assign the meaning, you did.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Orcin /img/forum/go_quote.gif It's apparent to me that you are embarrassed by your own stereotyping and you are trying to find some way out of the situation without looking like you were wrong to start slinging insults. It's not going to work. Either stand by your insensitive comments, or take them back, or quit posting about it.

I'm embarrassed? You're funny. I'm a dyed in the wool Liberal S.O.B. and generally have very low opinions of anyone in upper management of a larger corporation. You're the one who bragged that you are the CFO of a 500 million dollar manufacturing company, that left your occupation open for comment. That along with your defense of unethical behavior demanded some ridicule. I am in no way withdrawing any of my comments. You condone and defend and perhaps even practice what I and it seems many here find unethical behavior (My calling it stealing is personal hyperbole), that in conjunction with your occupation still leaves me unsurprised.

And now I am done with this thread, for we are truly

 

[Orcin]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yikes /img/forum/go_quote.gif I'm a dyed in the wool Liberal S.O.B. and generally have very low opinions of anyone in upper management of a larger corporation.

Well, at least you do admit that you form your opinion of people without having any personal knowledge about them, based on stereotyped conceptions of what they must be like.

 

[earwicker7]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Larry I /img/forum/go_quote.gif No problem with any of the three scenarios. The prospective customer actually intended to buy, but intervening circumstances changed the decision. The ethical questions arise where the "customer" really does not intend, from the start, to buy from the person who he "uses" for the purpose of helping decide on a purchase elsewhere.

Agreed. Intent is everything.

 

[Sherwood]

Interestingly enough, if you find the right shop they may well be willing to let you listen to gear you don't intend to buy.

I had a few "customers" when I worked in high-end retail that enjoyed coming in, shooting the breeze, and listening to some gear they would never buy. They were upfront about it. Most of them had purchased other equipment from me, but some were just folks who wanted to hear some good stereo gear.

If you're amiable, and have an interest in the business, it's not unthinkable that you might find a kindred spirit working at a hi-fi shop. The folks I enjoyed had a respect for my intelligence and didn't pretend they were going to buy equipment, and they had a respect for my time and didn't spend all day.

Honesty is worth a shot.

 

[linuxworks]

Quote:

Originally Posted by earwicker7 /img/forum/go_quote.gif If you want free music, listen to the radio or the homeless guy on the corner who plays guitar. Don't "rip" or "burn" or whatever the **** it is you kids are calling it these days in order to convince yourself it isn't stealing.

lets talk about radio, then.

radio is a flat rate payment system. doesn't matter if there are 10 or 100 or 10000 people listening. the artist gets a PITTANCE from it.

it seems the music industry is OK (!) with a flat rate fee. ok...

but then they also want a fee per unit when its 'sold'.

let me ask you, how does one tell the diff between a broadcast that I saved to tape (old school terms) vs a store bought piece of media?


this is way more complex than many of you are making it out to be. by some of your logic, if I don't donate each time I happen to hear the song (radio, etc) I'm 'stealing'.

sorry, but I don't buy that (lol).;

this is virtual 'property' and its not at all like hamburgers.

...and that reminds me, its lunch time

time to go 'rip' a burger! or maybe the restaurant will 'burn' one for me...