Ethics Question# 2: What Do You Think

[asim99]

similar to the other post /ethics-question-1-what-do-you-think-166530/

READ THIS FIRST POST COMPLETELY, DECIDE WHAT YOUR RESPONSE WILL BE, POST YOUR RESPONSE IF POSSIBLE
READ OTHERS' RESPONSES ONLY AFTER YOU HAVE MADE A DECISION ON YOUR OWN
COMPARE AND ENJOY AND DEBATE
the response of new york times' ethicist (randy cohen) in post # 5 by blunt
---------
case-2
---------

My son's school announced that a $750 scholarship would be awarded to the senior submitting the best short essay by Feb. 1. After the deadline, the school announced that because only one student had applied for the scholarship, it was extending the deadline. My son protested: according to the rules, he should be the winner because he submitted the only and therefore best essay. Was it ethical to extend the deadline? Steven Tanzer, Bayside, N.Y.

[bionicbadger]

My son's school announced that a $750 scholarship would be awarded to the senior submitting the best short essay by Feb. 1. After the deadline, the school announced that because only one student had applied for the scholarship, it was extending the deadline. My son protested: according to the rules, he should be the winner because he submitted the only and therefore best essay. Was it ethical to extend the deadline? Steven Tanzer, Bayside, N.Y.

No it wasn't ethical. Rules should be followed to the letter. If you are going to break/bend the rules, then you need make that fact clear beforehand and change the rule. If you can't follow your own rules, they shouldn't be there in the first place.

[asim99]

No it wasn't ethical. Rules should be followed to the letter. If you are going to break/bend the rules, then you need make that fact clear beforehand and change the rule. If you can't follow your own rules, they shouldn't be there in the first place.

keep in mind, there is only one entry into the competition

[CSR]

I would complain to the organizer..

[Blunt]

Even if the son were content to win on a technicality, he doesn't have much of a case. If the prize is for ''the best short essay,'' the school may not award it to him. The superlative ''best'' necessarily refers to the most impressive of three or more -- good, better, best. If there are not at least three entries, there can be no best essay. Live by legalisms; die by legalisms.

The school should have provided for just such a contingency in the rules, but it would be hyperbolic to accuse it of being unethical. Presumably it is trying, in its imperfect way, to fulfill the purpose of the contest, which is not simply to enrich your son (however desirable that might be) but to honor and encourage student writing. Your approach would compel the school to fork over the cash to your son even if he had submitted a page of randomly typed gibberish.

Blunt

[Bordello]

It's a shame they did that. The kid made an effort to write a friggin essay whereas no one else bothered to. He's entitled to the scholarship IMO.

Does anyone know if extending deadlines for contests is legal?

[Blunt]

Was it ethical for me to do that?

Reasons please...

[asim99]

not very ethical, blunt

Even if the son were content to win on a technicality, he doesn't have much of a case. If the prize is for ''the best short essay,'' the school may not award it to him. The superlative ''best'' necessarily refers to the most impressive of three or more -- good, better, best. If there are not at least three entries, there can be no best essay. Live by legalisms; die by legalisms.

The school should have provided for just such a contingency in the rules, but it would be hyperbolic to accuse it of being unethical. Presumably it is trying, in its imperfect way, to fulfill the purpose of the contest, which is not simply to enrich your son (however desirable that might be) but to honor and encourage student writing. Your approach would compel the school to fork over the cash to your son even if he had submitted a page of randomly typed gibberish.

Blunt

[jianlian]

That is wrong.

Similarly in school, I had situations where I worked my ass off to get an assignment finished... only to find out hours before the deadline that there would be an extension, and that people who finished "early" wouldn't get any credit for it. grrrr

[bionicbadger]

keep in mind, there is only one entry into the competition

So what? Was there a provision in the rules stating that if not enough entries were received the deadline would be extended? Was there a minimum entry requirement stated? Or did it say "a $750 scholarship would be awarded to the senior submitting the best short essay by Feb. 1". Since only one submission qualified, it wins by default. What bearing does only one entry submitted have?

[Blunt]

Actually, I read this column on a weekly basis and there are some answers that I definately don't agree with.
I'll try to fish some up..

[asim99]

i find it an interesting discussion topic
btw, can you access last week's question on 'fake' vs 'knockoff'?

Actually, I read this column on a weekly basis and there are some answers that I definately don't agree with.
I'll try to fish some up..

[Bortman]

Completely unethical, he should have won fair and square.

[danfromwaterloo]

similar to the other post http://forums.redflagdeals.com/showthread.php?t=166530

READ THIS FIRST POST COMPLETELY, DECIDE WHAT YOUR RESPONSE WILL BE, POST YOUR RESPONSE IF POSSIBLE
READ OTHERS' RESPONSES ONLY AFTER YOU HAVE MADE A DECISION ON YOUR OWN
COMPARE AND ENJOY AND DEBATE
the response of new york times' ethicist (randy cohen) in post # 5 by blunt
---------
case-2
---------

Yes, I think that its totally ethical - in the sense that the generally accepted definition of ethics is the practice of morality. A scholarship basically is a contest to see who deserves the money most. They are entitled to put whatever restriction they want on the eligibility of the contest. If that's so, then its also within their ethical boundry to extend the deadline.

Here's a rebuttal ethical question: is it ethical to assume you DESERVE the scholarship (read: free money) when the spirit of the scholarship has not been met?

[bionicbadger]

Here's a rebuttal ethical question: is it ethical to assume you DESERVE the scholarship (read: free money) when the spirit of the scholarship has not been met?

Ethical? Maybe not. But the law is on your side.

Is it ethical for the school to change their pre-stated rules when they didn't get the results they wanted?