ethics : WHAT OBLIGATION, IF ANY, DOES A GROUP HAVE TO SELF-REGULATE? [+] serious ballot by herzog ACTIVE Wed Sep 27, 06 - Thu Sep 27, 07 Religious, political, special interest, etc. Any group with a large number of members is bound to have some extremists. So to what extent do the majority have a responsibility to reign in their more extreme members? For instance, an enviromental advocacy group is working legally to improve the enviroment. But some of their members get impatient, announce at a meeting their intent to do something more significant, then go off and blow up some oil refineries. Do the other members have any obligation to denounce these acts in public, contact the authorities, make it clear they don't stand for these things, etc? Or are they entirely free of any responsibilities? 1 - groups have absolutely no obligation to reign in, criticize, or inform on their radical members 2 - criticize them whenever asked their opinion, but don't go too far out of their way to do so 3 - they ought to speak out against them, but nothing more 4 - criticize them publicly, and cooperate with authorities when asked to do so 5 - condemn them frequently in harsh terms, actively inform on their activities to the authorities Ballot #102589 : SEE RESULTS Comment: show your vote with comment?

v 2.0

© BESTANDWORST.COM

smile bank: