Your word is your word.
Under most circumstances, but consider that at least in my program, there were a great many things that were part of the "code of silence". If I break that, in order to help another, is it it wrong?
If he gave his word to TheWho, yes, you're probably right, but even then, as in the above example, there are always times... It depends. I have very little, if any compassion for people who participate, however indirectly, in this cancerous industry.
I have no compassion for anyone but the victims. I have a great curiosity about the individual who lives any part of 'that life'. Aren't you 'supporting' them by observing the 'code'? And the fact is your word is your word -- or it isn't.
I don't think this will cost anyone sleep, but it will make me a little less-trusting of you ::mecry::
Well. The way I see it is this: Fornits is a place where the little Fornits run around and shine light on things that the industry doesn't want anybody to know about.
My policy with private communications in normal circumstances is this (it's time I wrote this down, since this policy is scattered in a hundred places on this forum):Anything with survivors (except those who become industry members): No publication without permission. All correspondence considered privileged by default. If confidence is explicitly stated, communication will not even be shared with "privileged" parties such as close friends who might give advice on the situation. In most cases, when I share information with friends, I redact identifying information.Anything with survivors who are became industry members:
Same as above unless great danger could be prevented with the release of the information, and in which case it will likely be done with redacted names..
Why the compassion, some wonder? Because Everybody has a heart. Plus -- from a strategic perspective... If survivors wake up, while still insiders.. I'd like to see that happen.
Anything with parents who are not industry members: Same as rules for survivors.
Anything with parents who are industry members: same as survivors who are industry members.
Industry members, Ed cons (including you, Sue Scheff, and you too Lon!): State of relationship is war. Words will be used as weapons. Dirty fighting allowed. Why? In my opinion, they know what they are doing hurts kids yet continue to do it because it makes them money. They
I really try to keep to these general set of rules. In program I learned to forget my own ethics, i did things that weren't me. Now I am "restoring the backup" rules; Trying to find who I was before program, and re-writing some basic ethical structures as I go (to relate to what I feel is right (which is usually based on "how would i like to be treated") ).
Well. That's my "code of personal email ethics". I've posted these general policies back before.