OzBargain Ethics

_Bruce_ on 20/12/2012 - 18:32
Last edited 24/12/2012 - 12:16

I have been curious at some of the judgements a number of people here have made (or not made) on other members and I thought the results of this Ethics poll might prove interesting in understanding the community. I have listed some examples and the poll is to rank them from most ethical to least ethical.

Note: There are no wrong answers. You may think they are all ethical or all unethical, but they can still be ranked.

Example A:
There is a games bundle for for 'pay what you want'. You own a couple of the games, and not sure if you will get around to playing the others, so you buy the bundle for 1c.

Example B:
You walk past a busker playing a tune that you like and they are doing a reasonable job of it. You wait till the song ends, then walk on without contributing.

Example C:
A store advertises the latest gizmo at a clearly mistaken price. Expecting the store not to honour the mistake, you take the advertisement to a competitor to price match the gizmo.

Poll Options

  • 36
    A, B, C
  • 25
    A, C, B
  • 87
    B, A, C
  • 17
    B, C, A
  • 34
    C, A, B
  • 11
    C, B, A
General Discussion

Comments

    • Gina Rinehart on 20/12/2012 - 23:11
      +3

      Executed might be a little extreme…

      • drdolphin on 21/12/2012 - 08:46
        +4

        Execution is too good for them. Especially those who think it ok to butcher 'Wonderwall'

    • Radar on 21/12/2012 - 11:36
      +4

      not all buskers are shit - I've heard plenty of good ones.
      Still I don't feel the need to pay them for it - but then I don't stop to listen either.

    • nikey2k27 on 23/12/2012 - 20:03

      pricematching is going to get harder to do. as more people try and screwed them over.

  • altomic on 20/12/2012 - 23:07
    +6
  • m0nkeycheese on 21/12/2012 - 00:00
    +5

    This should include an option for people that exploit a deal for the sole purpose of reselling (aka brodening)

    • _Bruce_ on 21/12/2012 - 06:46

      Didn't want to make it too long/complicated and tried to have the options come out as close as I could (through guessing).

  • chiuy on 21/12/2012 - 04:30
    +1

    Alright! This can of worms is open!

    *grabs popcorn.

  • _Bruce_ on 21/12/2012 - 06:47
    +2

    I think the message is no matter what your answer is, there are people who think the exact opposite.

  • ethereal88 on 21/12/2012 - 09:09
    -1

    Er? None of those examples are unethical. Do people really have these hang ups and considerations?

    • tonyjzx on 21/12/2012 - 10:21
      +2

      ethics is an opinion

      i think it comes down to what is reasonable behaviour on both sides

      there's a 100 reply thread about minimum wage employees who should do "whatever the customer wants" as long as the customer is polite

      the reality is people have to follow procedures and they can get in trouble for even offering a free service is its not approved

      people keep their jobs by following rules not by helping customers

    • _Bruce_ on 21/12/2012 - 10:31
      +4

      Some people would think that 1c is an unethical payment when processing costs and delivery will be higher, so they are just wasting the distributors money.

      Others might think that stopping to listen to a busker is an informal contract and you have an obligation to contribute, you could have ignored them but choose not to.

      Other still might think that asking an (possibly) unreasonable price match is unfair on the staff member who is in a bad situation, or unfair in the business should the staff member allow it.

      The whole point is that ethics is different for everyone. It is perfectly fine for you to think these are all ethical, the only thing that isn't fine is to assume the same applies for everyone else.

  • jasef on 21/12/2012 - 11:15
    +2

    For me it's a simple combination of values mostly based on imagining if I was doing it:

    A. Do I care if the company/distributor goes out of business? For the Humble Bundle, yes I do! Pay AT LEAST enough to cover costs (including marketing/electicity etc) and a bit extra because u luv it.

    B. Is busker bringing enjoyment? Yes, pay if can or just say thanks or some form of appreciation

    C (1). Will I hurt a company that is struggling to grow/survive by a$$fuxoring them whent they made a mistake? Typically not.
    C (2) Can I help some mega-conglomerate certified-eco-socio-rapist company go out of business??? I sure hope so ;)

    Surely these simple kinds of thoughts are considered by even the scummiest of OZB's right???

    • _Bruce_ on 21/12/2012 - 11:18

      Surely these simple kinds of thoughts are considered by even the scummiest of OZB's right???

      See the post/replies above. 'scummiest' is all a matter of perspective, people value different things.

    • retiredfeline on 21/12/2012 - 11:24

      The problem is believing that judgements are clear cut or universal. People succumb to their personal inclinations more than they would like to admit and also rationalise. For example say the busker is playing C&W. Someone who usually dislikes C&W might be less inclined to pay than if the busker were playing say Folk. Worse, they might justify it to themselves as Ah I don't like that sh*t US stuff anyway. Even if the songs are Aussie.

      • leiiv on 21/12/2012 - 12:54

        If they don't like the song, they would not wait and listen until it ends. Hence, not what the Example B is about.

        • retiredfeline on 21/12/2012 - 13:00
          +4

          No it's not that clear cut either. You might admire the playing but not like the style of the music. Or you might not like the style in general but happen to like that particular song because it means something to you. Nothing is ever straightforward, which is why a mere sentence or two fails to capture the complexity of real life.

        • tonyjzx on 22/12/2012 - 17:42

          there are a few ways to think about this

          I have absolutely no love for the way Coles and Woolworths have manipulated the consumer landscape.

          So I try not to buy anything from them unless its on sale. Or Pricematch.

          By the same token, you can have no doubt that many of our super funds are with Colesworth.

          I try not to do the 4c off petrol coupons as they are eventually quite the scam.

        • [Deactivated] on 22/12/2012 - 17:53

          Yes those 4c off petrol coupons are a scam, it's only useful if you already past the $30 already, I know now days the grocery bills comes up to $50 usually, so its no lose for me but for those who are spend like $25, then spend another $5 for the coupon it is really a scam. (marketing promo)

        • tonyjzx on 22/12/2012 - 18:42

          yeah i have no issue with that

          like they were doing 20c off with two slabs of their house brand beer

          if you were buying two slabs anyway for xmas, i see no harm in doing that

        • Daabido on 24/12/2012 - 06:39
          +2

          You will actually find that anything that is on sale at Woolies or Coles in their catalogue is funded by a decrease in price from the supplier, not a decrease in margin from the supermarket. That is how powerful they are.

        • tonyjzx on 25/12/2012 - 02:33

          yeah i'm well aware of that

          you can tell how powerful coles and woolworths are when they can strong arm companies like Nestle and CC Amatil

          excuse me? they are putting the pressure on Fortune 500 multinationals?

          of course in the big picture do you want to be a part of that sort of thing?

          i dont think too much about when i'm drinking a scotch and coke

    • chiuy on 21/12/2012 - 13:57
      +1

      A 'simple combination'?
      Like it's ever so simple.

  • Geewhizz on 22/12/2012 - 13:52

    There are a lot of variables in the first two options, so it's not clear cut.

  • chir0nex on 22/12/2012 - 15:58
    -1

    lol how lots of people think C is the least ethical…

    • Tal_Shiar on 22/12/2012 - 16:20
      -1

      people should be more concerned about the people that voted C, A, B, and the chip they probably have on thier shoulder

  • tikei on 22/12/2012 - 20:51

    For me B would be the least ethical, as I've already got the enjoyment from the service, yet didn't pay for it.

    A and C has yet to happen. Wouldn't know if there'll be enjoyment to be gained from the games, but 1c is too low as it doesn't cover costs. For C the competitor wouldn't price match it. If it's too good to be true, so cheap that I know it was a mistake that the original store wouldn't honour it, I wouldn't expect a competitor to.

    • Tal_Shiar on 22/12/2012 - 22:30

      whats the difference between walking past a busker thats playing a tune you like, or standing on the street and a hoon drives by playing the latest hit song? Your entertained by both, where exactly is the ethical dilemma on B again? How do you know the busker is licensed, is he ripping someones song off? o 0 the dilemmas!!

      • tikei on 22/12/2012 - 23:00
        +1

        lol, who's having the chip on their shoulder :P ?

        The difference is simple - the street performer is performing in hopes to earn some money from people who appreciate his playing. He's playing for other people to hear and hopefully enjoy so he can get money in return. The moral dilemma for me here is that you actually stopped to listen and liked it (accepted the service). If everyone who liked it just walked off without paying then he would get no money from this. I'm treating his playing as a type of service.
        The hoon is obviously not doing it as an offer of service.

        The busker license and the doing of cover songs may be issues, but not something I'm concerned with. We all place different values on different things (this is what this thread is all about, right?)

        • Tal_Shiar on 23/12/2012 - 00:02
          -2

          You stop because you like it, I stop because its horrible, where is the contract "accepted" again?

        • tikei on 23/12/2012 - 03:27

          If there was an explicit written contract then this example wouldn't be listed here in a thread about ethics as you would clearly be breaking the contract/law. Read Bruce's reply a few posts back - mentions informal contract - that's how I view street performers. You don't have to see them the same way I do, of course.

          But why would anyone stop to listen to songs they think it's horrible? Why bother hurting your ears? Anyhow, the example said you thought they did reasonably well. If I hated the performance I would just walk on without paying.

        • retiredfeline on 23/12/2012 - 11:59

          It's more nuanced than that. There are styles of music I wouldn't listen to on a regular basis, however I might enjoy a particular performance. So I might think, that's a pretty good rendition, but I don't want to encourage this style of music so I won't contribute, because somebody else will and I will contribute to buskers I like. I may not even vocalise this sentiment, it may subtly influence me. For example I don't seek out K-pop, but recently I watched some dancers in a class using Gangnam Style as soundtrack, and it was fun.

          BTW, "hurt your ears" already indicates a value judgement. It's not a confined dance venue, so busker volumes don't actually damage your ears.

          It's easy to be reductionist when writing about it but value judgements and life are messier than that.

        • tikei on 23/12/2012 - 14:13

          Likewise, you were too quick to judge me for making a value judgement when I used the phrase 'hurt your ears'. It was purely for emphasis. In no way did I mean it literally - like when some ppl say swear words hurt their ears, or someone broke their heart, no one was actually using a hammer to break anyone's heart.

          As for the rest, I agree that life is more complex than what can be explained in words.

  • Jabba the Hutt on 23/12/2012 - 11:42

    Seems like OzBargain's answer to Michael Sandel. The circumstances are pretty close in nature and open to a lot of ifs and buts, so I'm not able to rank them with any confidence.

    Years ago on Whirlpool there was a poll about the ethics of attempting to return computer peripherals you'd broken for replacement/repair under warranty (e.g. a hard disk you dropped on the floor). The choice there was much less ambiguous to me, but what was interesting was how split people were. About half voted it fine to attempt a warranty replacement and not mention their role in the product's failure.

  • peterpeterpumpkin on 23/12/2012 - 12:56
    +2

    You pretty much summarised my day.

    After waking up in my mansion I decided to contact my bank to dispute the 100s of pay-what-you-want game bundles I purchased for 1 cent each. You know, just for the kicks. I wonder if they‘ll be charged 100s of chargeback fees at 20 dollars a pop?

    I then went for a brisk walk among the common folk where I stumbled upon a busker. Seizing the opportunity to make a great day better I pulled out a 5 dollar note when the crowd finally cleared to give me access to his hat. I gladly dropped the note and withdrew a clean crisp replacement. I couldn‘t pass off that torn note for months and frankly it was getting to be a burden.

    I saw a ridiculously low price at Harvey Norman, nearing RRP. Knowing it was an obvious mistake and that it was overpriced anyway, I got my house cleaner studying graphic design to modify the flyer to show half-price and to change the contact number to my home number, where she would answer the phone to confirm the deal. I then looked for a. struggling mom-and-pop computer shop to honour the deal.

    I felt bad at times, but I guess ethics are subjective. You know, like, I should have taken more game bundles but I guess I‘m just too nice a guy.

  • _Bruce_ on 23/12/2012 - 13:52

    I find it interesting that BAC is the most popular, but the reverse (CAB) is far from the least.

    Also I suspect that BAC is (slightly) artificially inflated as people may be influenced by the popularity to indicate that it is the correct choice.

    Some more lies^H^H^H^Hstatistics:

    40% think that A is more ethical than B
    74% think that A is more ethical than C
    69% think that B is more ethical than C

    • scotty on 24/12/2012 - 14:04
      +3

      people may be influenced by the popularity to indicate that it is the correct choice.

      Maybe we should hide the votes so people can only see the result after voted? Or only see the result after the poll has expired?

      • _Bruce_ on 24/12/2012 - 16:07

        Perhaps, but as with all internet voting, the results are so questionable anyway that I wouldn't lose sleep over it.

      • hyp3dup on 24/12/2012 - 18:11

        Yep, I agree.
        In fact, I covered the vote tally with my hand before I voted because I didn't want it to influence my decision in any way.

    • _Bruce_ on 24/12/2012 - 16:09

      BAC and CAB are now ranked 1 and 2. I didn't expect that.

  • neophytte on 24/12/2012 - 11:36

    A. I don't really play games (although I'll occasionally download a freebie)

    B. I rarely carry coins with me so don't usually pay for the listen, although I have done in the right set of circumstances.

    C. I would try the store first, and probably last (as it's clearly a mistake, but not one a competitor should pay for!!). BTW: I think you mean "expecting"

    Cheers

    Richard

    • _Bruce_ on 24/12/2012 - 12:16

      Thanks, fixed.

  • rygle on 24/12/2012 - 12:23
    -1

    Trolls down voting people who are genuinely trying to help are close to the bottom of my OzBargain ethics list. And yes I am wondering how long until this post gets nuked into last century…

    • Radar on 24/12/2012 - 16:09
      +2

      Good point, but misuse of the word "troll" grinds my gears even more - we can probably thank the bloody media for that.

      • cwongtech on 24/12/2012 - 16:41

        Especially because of Charlotte Dawson.

    • Davo1111 on 24/12/2012 - 21:07
      +1

      it appears you don't know what a troll is.

  • CookieMunster on 25/12/2012 - 01:02

    I'm going to say B, because I don't really listen to any good buskers. I live in the Logan area, and all the buskers here are either stoned or drunk, and they would actually have to pay ME to have to listen to them. I don't really like the other options, as they're not really something I would do and be able to keep a straight face.

    • [Deactivated] on 25/12/2012 - 01:19

      the buskers here are either stoned or drunk …

      Like the balance of the populace in the Logan LGA …

  • [Deactivated] on 25/12/2012 - 01:07
    +1

    I'm mainly curious about what a busker would pay for a gizmo if they could pay what they wanted.

  • [Deactivated] on 25/12/2012 - 01:25

    I was at a big department store once, and they had a vacuum cleaner at half price: $130 down from $260. Thing is, when i hit the checkout it came up as $65. Once i got to the car, i spent some minutes thinking about whether to try my luck at getting another one. I prefer the word 'fortuitous' over the word 'unethical'.

  • tasty-falafel on 25/12/2012 - 07:27

    You forgot to add D - Scumbags who abuse the system and sign up multiple accounts to get free stuff, sometimes resulting in the promotion being shut down.

  • Krizy on 26/12/2012 - 17:06

    I'd try anything to score a saving at the expensive of an employee. Hearing music and not paying for it though? Why, receiving music means you've entered in to a musical contract! Should definitely pay up then.

    Really. Employees > buskers.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join