Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

Return to index: [Subject] [Thread] [Date] [Author]

Fwd: Re: building code minimums for wood frame

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
>The above argument actually supports my skepticism better than any examples I
>could have come up with.  These statutes and canons of ethics have been on
>the books for decades.  Why, then, have the levels of professionalism
>remained so low?  A major reason is that, for most people, laws don't change
>behavior - incentives do!
The foregoing is a non-answer that begs the question, all in a single 
paragraph. Society is hip-deep in incentives. Sounds like you're 
recommending we ignore the law because it's inconvenient and runs 
contrary to human nature. All laws run contrary to some aspect of human 
nature and they all inconvenience someone--if they didn't we wouldn't 
need them. A 'strategic plan' for decency is nonsense anyway--we all know 
what decent behavior is.

>A reality check for Chris:  Request the Minnesota and Florida boards to
>provide you with a list of registrants who were disciplined or had licenses
Both states publish all actions in their quarterly newsletters. Total 
revocation is infrequent, most sanctions (5-10 per quarter) range from 
mandatory ethics training to suspension for a period of years. Florida is 
pretty tough. They have no qualms about pulling tickets, and the Florida 
law is quite detailed. Minnesota's practice regarding snitching is to 
investigate complaints anonymously. If action is brought the proceedings 
are public only if necessary. I suspect most involve egregious behavior 
or matters of public record and the board simply confronts the hack with 
the stained carpet: I daresay the hack owns up and cops a plea to avoid 
more serious sanctions.  Enough reality for you?

>The challenge remains to develop a better balance between group interest and
>self interest so that almost all registrants will have sufficient incentives
>to support and comply with the spirit of the laws noted above.  It is a very
>daunting challenge, appropriate for the bright minds that inhabit this
>listserv to tackle.  I look forward to reading your contributions.
Such a lukewarm pronouncement is the problem, not the solution. As a 
registrant, we are obligated to put the public interest paramount. It 
ain't no 'strategic plan' just the fact of registration. To be 
even-handed, we aren't obligated to starve to death to fulfill our public 
duty, but I doubt if that's ever been necessary. The point has been made 
in this thread several times--hanging out with scavengers isn't that far 
removed from starvation, anyway. 

Christopher Wright P.E.    |"They couldn't hit an elephant from
chrisw(--nospam--at)        | this distance"   (last words of Gen.
___________________________| John Sedgwick, Spotsylvania 1864)

--- Internet Message Header Follows ---
Received: from ( [])
	by (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id NAA25161
	for <rlewis(--nospam--at)>; Sat, 1 Mar 1997 13:00:53 -0600 (CST)
Received: from by (NTList 3.02.10) id
va005091; Sat, 1 Mar 1997 10:52:47 -0800
Received: from [](really []) by
	via smtpd with smtp
	id <m0w0trV-0004GiC(--nospam--at)>
	for <seaoc(--nospam--at)>; Sat, 1 Mar 1997 12:50:25 -0600 (CST)
	(Smail-3.2 1996-Jul-4 #4 built 1997-Feb-13)
Message-Id: <m0w0trV-0004GiC(--nospam--at)>
Subject: Re: building code minimums for wood frame
Date: Sat, 1 Mar 97 12:57:18 -0600
X-Sender: seaoc-ad(--nospam--at)
x-mailer: Claris Emailer 1.1
From: Christopher Wright <chrisw(--nospam--at)>
To: "SEAOC Newsletter" <seaoc(--nospam--at)>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Reply-To: seaoc(--nospam--at)
Error-To: seaoc-ad(--nospam--at)
X-Loop: seaoc(--nospam--at)
X-Info: [SEAOC]
Owner: seaoc-ad(--nospam--at)
X-POP3-Rcpt: seaoc-ad(--nospam--at)
Precedence: list
X-ListMember: rlewis(--nospam--at) [seaoc(--nospam--at)]


Richard Lewis, P.E.
Missionary TECH Team

The service mission like-minded Christian organizations
may turn to for technical assistance and know-how.