4 comments on “The M.O. Of Hershel Shanks

  1. Breakiing the rules sounds like a problem for your closed group but isn’t the existence of rules that inhibit the free flow of information an even bigger problem? To modify what you said, scholarship is an enterprise which cannot be best undertaken when rules inhibit the flow of information

    • Sometimes discussions are private for a reason. And even then if you agree to discussion parameters you are ethically bound to abide by them and if you don’t you lack morals.

  2. I don’t know the internal workings of your group nor its size nor why the discussions in a group (as opposed to example a conversation between 2 people) need to be private, but I wonder if the choice faced by the rule breaker was between keeping their word in keeping a bad rule or breaking their word in breaking a bad rule? Does the rule help or hinder the flow of information?

    • again- and the only point at issue here- is the fact that a person who agreed to a set of standards by joining the list of their own accord, acted dishonestly and unethically.

      if you have no problem with unethical behavior that’s your issue.

Comments are closed.