Re:Elizabeth Holmes found guilty
by bumby on Tuesday January 04, 2022 @04:27PM
(#29800781)
>based more upon a gut plausibility of a scenario rather than a clear outline of information.
What meets your threshold for a conflict of interest? Maybe I'm being too harsh, but this seems to meet my personal threshold.
It's like if a politician heads a committee that has large sway in government contracts and they are close to someone who happens to invest in companies that bid on those contracts. It's easy to see a conflict exists even if a straight-line to a crime does not. Ethics often boils down to managing these conflicts so there isn't even a perceived avenue for impropriety. A politician breaches ethical boundaries irrespective if there’s unequivocal evidence they let the relationship impact their decision. There does not need to be a smoking gun.
What meets your threshold for a conflict of interest? Maybe I'm being too harsh, but this seems to meet my personal threshold.
It's like if a politician heads a committee that has large sway in government contracts and they are close to someone who happens to invest in companies that bid on those contracts. It's easy to see a conflict exists even if a straight-line to a crime does not. Ethics often boils down to managing these conflicts so there isn't even a perceived avenue for impropriety. A politician breaches ethical boundaries irrespective if there’s unequivocal evidence they let the relationship impact their decision. There does not need to be a smoking gun.