POLL: ATOT moral compass

[CKent]

Need more info. What are the defacto rules? I have no problem with screwing someone I hate, but not without just cause, as determined by yours truly.

 

[I Saw OJ]

Originally posted by: 91TTZ
No, you'd be a worthless rat who tried to get someone expelled because you don't like them. Decline the offer, but don't rat.

QFT

 

[aidanjm]

A would have to be a worthless piece of trash to report B

 

[daveshel]

The scenario does not state whether or how A answered B's emails. The easy answer is that A has a responsibility to report B's misconduct, but if A answers B's email in any way that violates the rules, his value of his evidence would be deprecated. Kind of like the Clean Hands Doctrine.

 

[Corporate Thug]

Originally posted by: daveshel
The scenario does not state whether or how A answered B's emails. The easy answer is that A has a responsibility to report B's misconduct, but if A answers B's email in any way that violates the rules, his value of his evidence would be deprecated. Kind of like the Clean Hands Doctrine.

No, if the email was answered, i would have stated that it was answered...

 

[moshquerade]

Originally posted by: Corporate Thug
Hypo:

Person A dislikes Person B (nothing serious, A just isnt a fan of B). During a take home final, B asks A for his thoughts and possible corroboration with the exam via email, both an express violation of the code of conduct. Such a violation would at the very least invoke a "review" on the matter, reporting the findings of the review on B's permanent record. The maximum punishment B faces is expulsion. The email can be easily traced to be so there is no issue that the claim cannot be authenticated. Should A report B?

i wouldn't even contemplate reporting B even if I disliked him. it wouldn't make me feel better about myself.

i would tell B he is wrong for trying to cheat this way.

 

[Childs]

No one likes a rat.

 

[chambersc]

Hmm...

 

[Captante]

I wouldn't cheat, but I most likely wouldn't turn B in either.

 

[daveshel]

Originally posted by: Corporate Thug

Originally posted by: daveshel
The scenario does not state whether or how A answered B's emails. The easy answer is that A has a responsibility to report B's misconduct, but if A answers B's email in any way that violates the rules, his value of his evidence would be deprecated. Kind of like the Clean Hands Doctrine.

No, if the email was answered, i would have stated that it was answered...

OK, I answered this as if it were a bar exam question, in which part of the question would be th lawyer's responsibility to the legal community and society. Outside of that limited context, the Clean Hands Doctrine might yield to concerns of self preservation, which would definitely preclude reporting the misconduct.

Were you mining in the vein of moral high road versus the smart thing to do/CYA?