Re: ethics discussion

• Date: Tue, 27 Feb 1996 08:48:22 PST
• From:
  tom@mvision.com (Tom Ritchford)
• Reply-To:
  tom@mvision.com
• In-Reply-To: <199602262155.NAA13276@eng4.sequent.com> (message from Ben Jackson on Mon, 26 Feb 1996 13:55:00 PST)

Ben Jackson <bjj@sequent.com> did not have a good time...
>In message <199602261617.LAA18720@kanga.INS.CWRU.Edu> , Seth I. Rich wrote:
>> It's a difficult
>> thing to have, for example, a RL mess which takes place in part on the
>> MOO.  It takes an amazingly responsible person (IMO) to resist the
>> temptation that exists when in such a situation.
>
>As someone who was a victim of a less than amazingly responsible person
>when such a situation arose, I must say that I don't think a code of
>ethics would have made a bit of difference.  She was out for revenge
>and felt that destroying hundreds (thousands?) of hours of my work was
>a reasonable "punishment."  I think she did it because she could get
>away with it.  I'm sure if murder were restricted only by a "code of
>ethics", she would have considered killing me.

There's no excuse for deliberately destroying work.
That's about as low as you can get.

OTOH, I make off-site backups of every scrap of code I write.
Even the most well-intentioned MOO administrator might end up
losing the database.  When we first started Id, there was a
terrible crash right while the database was being backed up
onto tape -- and it turned out that the site was using only
a single tape to backup to.  So we lost several month's work,
although we'd luckily not had too many characters as yet.

But I had some more-or-less up-to-date off-site backups
of just my code so I was OK.

    /t

Tom Ritchford     tom@mvision.com, tom@weirdos.com

Verge's "Little Idiot" -- Music for the mentally peculiar.
1-800-WEIRDOS           http://www.fly.net/~tom/verge.html

• Re: ethics discussion
• From: Ben Jackson <bjj@sequent.com>

• Prev: Re: ethics discussion
• Next: EWW nasty panic
• Index: MOO-cows
• Thread: MOO-cows