Diebold Shows How to Make Your Own Voting Machine Key

[Brian Ellis]

Yeah, right!

[Sasq]

A mutual fund to which I subscribe has large holdings in Microsoft and BP (>5% of the fund in each). I'm therefore, indirectly, holding a few thousand $ worth of stock in two companies which have been deemed unethical by some. Should I sell these funds?

no, to purge yourself fully you should give them away.

I'll email you later with my details to complete the transfer.

[Brian Ellis]

A mutual fund to which I subscribe has large holdings in Microsoft and BP (>5% of the fund in each). I'm therefore, indirectly, holding a few thousand $ worth of stock in two companies which have been deemed unethical by some. Should I sell these funds?

[Umfriend]

I don't think it is supposed to work that way Doc. A charge was made without supporting arguments. It's not normal to ask the accused to go look for evidence against him. I guess to date the conclusion simply is that there is nothing unethical about owning NEDAP stock.

Cheers.

[Dr Mordrid]

Watch the documentary "Hacking Democracy" then consult your concience. If you then don't see red flags waving like a parade in Pyongyang then I guess you're OK

[Umfriend]

That is a charge. I still see no argument. What ethical rule exactly is being breached by me here?

[Dr Mordrid]

It would be if you didn't divest after learning of their 'troubles'.

[Umfriend]

OK, no 'malcious intent', how about 'reckless disregard'...AKA negligence?

Absolutely. Especially how they reacted to the claims of the activists was not only stupid, it was unprofessional. AFAIK, that has not changed. Suffice to say that the stock has not exactly performed above market.

As a stockowner I see this as a case of bad luck: wrong company to have invested in. The charge however was that it was unethical to own stock in this company. I submit that there still is no argument why owning it would be that.

[az]

I don't say there is any malicious intent from your part, and there are certainly things worse than owning NEDAP stock.

[Dr Mordrid]

OK, no 'malcious intent'.

How about 'reckless disregard'...AKA negligence, leading to a civil violation of the Voting Rights Act?

[Umfriend]

1. Someone has to own them
3. ****-ups happen (see?)
2. These devices were not made with the intention of fraud or enabling it
4. They don't specialise in "devices that are (OK, easily can be) used to undermine democracy"

Unless you can argue there is even a hint of malicious intent, I don't see how ethics come into play. I think you just hate me because you and your owner continiously fail to eat me (which IS unethical).

[az]

Owning stock in a company that specializes in devices that are (OK, easily can be) used to undermine democracy.

[Umfriend]

? What is unethical?

[az]

I think that's unethical.

[Umfriend]

Which is good for me because I own some stock in the company that produces them.....