> On June 07, 2001 at 23:49:44, Dave wrote:
> > Then tonight, I realized that chat isn't a friggin democracy. It's a dictatorship, and Sam is the Pharoah. So if there are 500 lamers in chat and only six non-lamers, and Sam decrees that the lamers must go, they MUST GO. End of friggin story.
> >
> > And, as BG says, as ops and admins, we have the responsibility to uphold what SAM wants, not what we want or what we might think is right. So if what Elly was doing was something she felt Sam would have done, she's absolutely in the right, by definition. End of story.
> >
> > -- Dave
>
> Dave, did you ever hear about the ethical obligation to *higher* responsibility from the Nuremburg Trials? Examine your logic again when you say "we have the responsibility to uphold what SAM wants, not what we want or what we might think is right." What is this -- a hands-off & hold-your-nose policy to partisan politics? Not to put too fine a point on it, but what you are suggesting is unethical.


I don't want to speak for Dave, so let me just say that the way I took his statement -- and the way I believe it was probably intended -- is that Sam's *is* the higher standard, and therefore the one we should guide ourselves by in Rinkchat.