From: jamesd@netcom.com (James A. Donald)
Date: Wed, 21 Sep 94 21:17:48 PDT
To: tcmay@netcom.com (Timothy C. May)
Subject: Re: HIT MEN
In-Reply-To: <aaa6821803021004ba9e@DialupEudora>
Message-ID: <199409220320.UAA00905@netcom10.netcom.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


Timothy C. May writes
> Gambling is illegal in most places, unless run by the state. And yet people
> gamble, illegally. They use bookies. Bookies who are doing illegal things,
> as the gamblers are. And yet if they get stiffed by a bookie, which
> _sometimes_ happens, they tell their friends, family, etc., and the
> reputation ripples spread.
> 
> Taking Sandy's "For murder escrows, a positive reputation is meaningless.
> They can't--nor can anyone else--risk exposure of such negative
> information. Escrows that admittedly engage in abetting criminal acts can
> have NO MEANINGFUL REPUTATIONS." argument, are we to assume that this
> applies to illegal betting? That stiffed bettors won't speak up because
> there are "Escrows that admittedly engage in abetting criminal acts can
> have NO MEANINGFUL REPUTATIONS"?

Illegal betting is merely illegal.  Murder is also immoral.  

This really does make a difference to reputations.

For example if you have a criminal record for shoplifting a
packet of cigarettes, most bosses will not hire you.  But
speeding or even drunk driving will not seriously affect
your employment prospects.

Similarly tax evasion convictions seem to have little effect
on ones credit rating.

,