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

Re: Ethic's Question

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
From: Daryl Richardson <h.d.richardson(--nospam--at)shaw.ca>
Date: Sat, 05 Jan 2002 02:32:24 -0700
To: seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org
Subject: Re: Ethic's Question

> 	This is an excellent reply, Ray; however, I think it's not quite
> complete.

It wasn't meant to be complete.  Just to indicate a course correction is needed in the discussion.  Much needs to be filled in.

>I think it's important that the seriousness
>of the subject code violation be considered.

That falls under responsibility to the general public.

>I have the impression that Steve is a fairly
>young engineer as opposed to being a senior
>engineer just recently relocated.

This situation occurs to the most experienced of us.  Age is not an issue.

>I would suggest, firstly, Steve, that you confide privately with two or
> three senior engineers to get some advice on the seriousness of the code
> violation.  Two of the "better" engineers who have both responded to
> this thread and who have provided excellent responses to other threads
> are Paul Feather and Christopher Wright (but there are many others who
> are also excellent and also have intimate knowledge of the applicable
> codes), while you, Ray, are probably the most knowledgeable and
> realistic regarding the political, legal, and ethical side of this problem. ...

I thank you for your complement with mixed feelings as I'm not a lawyer, just a law consumer.

>.... I'm suggesting private correspondence as opposed to "on the
> list" because publishing confidential office business on the list may
> not be a very prudent thing to do (regardless of how much I and others
> might like to see it and help).

Steve: please realize that unless you are discussing matters with an attorney, nothing discussed on line, whether by this list or by private email, can be considered "confidential" and can be subpoenaed (hope I spelled that right).  However, with your own attorney, you have some attorney-client rights that may be to your benefit.

(I know, its the "own attorney" concept that makes it aggravating.)

Regards

--

_______________________________________________

Sign-up for your own FREE Personalized E-mail at Mail.com

http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup





1 cent a minute calls anywhere in the U.S.!



http://www.getpennytalk.com/cgi-bin/adforward.cgi?p_key=RG9853KJ&url=http://www.getpennytalk.com





******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
*   Read list FAQ at: http://www.seaint.org/list_FAQ.asp
*
*   This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers
*   Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To
*   subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
*
*   http://www.seaint.org/sealist1.asp
*
*   Questions to seaint-ad(--nospam--at)seaint.org. Remember, any email you
*   send to the list is public domain and may be re-posted
*   without your permission. Make sure you visit our web
*   site at: http://www.seaint.org
******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********