<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
<title></title>
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Stefano Vaj wrote:
<blockquote
cite="mid:AANLkTim-3NqYArvwStZGKkpVq4aNSzF_2AYdZ+nML5DE@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">2010/8/2 Jebadiah Moore <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:jebdm@jebdm.net"><jebdm@jebdm.net></a>:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">But it's pretty clear that it's
worthwhile to view a community as an entity (due to various emergent
phenomena), and that a lot of people do view communities this way, and that
people *value* communities this way. In particular, they seem invested in
trying to maintain the stability, influence, and "essence" (as they perceive
it) of the communities they belong to, both during their own lifetimes and
into the future.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
My own ideas fit rather well in your description.
But I am waaaaay reluctant in admitting that, say, a community could
and should be kept legally or ethically responsible for the behaviour
of its members.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
For damn good reason it should not. The individual is the unit of
ethics and moral responsibility. To hold and individual liable for
what she did not do is utterly broken.<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:AANLkTim-3NqYArvwStZGKkpVq4aNSzF_2AYdZ+nML5DE@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">
Say, as in "they shall pay for what they have done until the umpteenth
generation".
</pre>
</blockquote>
Yet another pseudo-religious hideous thought to be sure.<br>
<br>
- samantha<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>