[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
A Broader Interpretation of the C.O.E. RE: note for Darryl
The way the code of ethics reads (Pages 9,10 of your Rooster), the
transactions advertised in the BNL are covered by the "Code of Ethics".
However, Article III, Section 5 (Page 2,3), discusses disciplinary actions
for conduct contrary to the aims and best interests of the Association. I
believe Darryl's complaint fits under Article III. The AKA has a vested
interest in helping to maintain the highest ethical standards amongst its
members. So yes, I believe the AKA does have reprimand options even if the
transaction did not originate in the BNL but occurred between 2 AKA members.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-killietalk at aka_org [mailto:owner-killietalk at aka_org]On
Behalf Of Darryl Tsutsui
Sent: Friday, July 21, 2000 8:47 PM
To: killietalk at aka_org
Subject: Re: note for Darryl
Barry Cooper wrote:
>Let me clarify - the Code of Ethics only applies to transactions taking
>placed as a result of fish or eggs (or other killie-related items) that
>were listed in the F&EL. The AKA cannot act with regard to private
>agreements. Just think for a moment how impossible that would be.
>
>If a disagreement arises as a result of a deal made via the F&EL the
>appropriate thing to do is to contact Dr. Dan Nielsen. Usually he can help
>to sort the issue out. Ultimately, if a person were acting in a
>deliberately unethical manner, the AKA can refuse the right to list in the
>F&EL or take even more stringent action. Fortunately, I am not aware that
>such action has been necessary in a long time.
>
>Having made the point about the limits of the AKA's responsibilities I
>believe that almost every member is ethical and that the AKA does expect,
>even if it can't enforce in certain situations, ethical behavior from its
>members.
>
>I'd also like to point out that I hope you'll all be careful about airing
>complaints via this list. Remember that this is broadcasting your complaint
>to the world. In this particular case Darryl named no names, so there is no
>problem in that regard. I am just asking you all to think before you act.
>Lots of so-called flame wars erupt because someone dashed off a hasty
>message while angry.
As I recall now, the transaction was initiated from either the killietrader
or from a bulletin board post, so in effect what you're saying is that it is
not an AKA issue? Sounds like the argument about the stereotypical
churchgoer only being good on sundays. Ethics is ethics no matter where you
slice it, how you slice it, and who eats it, in this case, moi. When I make
a deal, I adhere to these AKA ethics as I understand them to be, because
quite frankly, it's just plain old common sense and decency. I was brought
up to believe and practice that your word is gold, as I'm sure most of the
members of the AKA are. If the AKA cannot reprimand someone for unethical
behavior outside of the BNL between 2 of it's active members concerning
killifish, what's it good for?
-Darryl Tsutsui
soon to be out of the AKA
________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com
---------------
See http://www.aka.org/AKA/subkillietalk.html to unsubscribe
---------------
See http://www.aka.org/AKA/subkillietalk.html to unsubscribe
References: