[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Aquatic Plants Digest V4 #1440
>Date: Sun, 02 Dec 2001 02:56:30 -0800
>From: Steve Pushak <teban at powersonic_bc.ca>
>Subject: APD guidelines
>The reason why I suggest that the APD guidelines should urge
>contributors NOT to complain on the list about their dissatisfaction is:
>1) they have other avenues to seek satisfaction first and more
>appropriately from the vendor. 2) even if the complaint is based in fact,
>it can disproportionately injure the vendor's reputation and hence cause
>him great financial harm.
If the complaint is based in fact, who CARES if the vendor's reputation is
>I am completely certain that any legitimate vendor would greatly prefer to
>refund your money rather than have you voice a complaint in a public
>forum such as the APD.
A "legitimate vendor" does not necessarily equate to "honest vendor".
>In fact, he is entitled to make restitution to you in
>order to avoid bad publicity.
That is not an entitlement for a vendor, it *is* a moral obligation and a
wise business move to do so *before* it comes to the point of becoming
>However, the APD is not required to make itself the vehicle for venting
>anger particularly where that would disproportionately harm someone
Muzzling protected speach is no way to protect or preserve anyone's
rights, this particularly true when there are real issues that need to be
brought to the light of day.
>Freedom of expression is a much cherished privilege not enjoyed by all.
>Let us not abuse it by forgetting our duties!
Stephen, one of the greatest duties of any society or people is to have an
eternal search for the truth.