No credit card required
Browse credit cards from a variety of issuers to see if there's a better card for you.
masdeocho wrote:
Gotta respectfully disagree with you here, Tusc. I could make a nice little legal argument that fully supports your position. But ethics are another story.Let's say a piece of info is correct, e.g., you (colloquial "you") were 60 days late. Suppose you don't know whether or not it's correct. Or you believe it's incorrect. OK, go ahead and dispute it.Now suppose that you know plain well that it is correct. You dispute it, but not because you have some noble intent to force the CRAs to do their job. We all have better ways to spend our time. Seriously. You dispute it because you're hoping you get lucky and they delete it. I think there's an ethical issue there.You are arguing that your knowledge of the correctness of the item is irrelevant in this ethical dilemma. I think your knowledge and intent has everything to do with it. JMHO.
I hear you. But I do feel that knowing is irrelevant. How do you know that my intentions are not strictly noble? And assuming they are, why shouldn't the CRAs delete! If my intentions are not noble, why should I scrutinize myself for the CRAs not doing their job to verify.
Two cents:
I really don’t see an ethical issue for me anyway!!! If the credit card industry, CRA’s, CA’s, and OC’s can hold us to be sub-human on paper and hide under the cloak of the law for their profit and gain….Then so be it, I want to hold them to the same letter of the law.
And if by chance I have been resurrected to be human again by those actions. I’ll carry that burden…can’t be can’t be any worse then this one.
Tusc - I have never had any doubt that your intentions are always the noblest.
Tuscani wrote:
masdeocho wrote:Gotta respectfully disagree with you here, Tusc. I could make a nice little legal argument that fully supports your position. But ethics are another story.Let's say a piece of info is correct, e.g., you (colloquial "you") were 60 days late. Suppose you don't know whether or not it's correct. Or you believe it's incorrect. OK, go ahead and dispute it.Now suppose that you know plain well that it is correct. You dispute it, but not because you have some noble intent to force the CRAs to do their job. We all have better ways to spend our time. Seriously. You dispute it because you're hoping you get lucky and they delete it. I think there's an ethical issue there.You are arguing that your knowledge of the correctness of the item is irrelevant in this ethical dilemma. I think your knowledge and intent has everything to do with it. JMHO.
I hear you. But I do feel that knowing is irrelevant. How do you know that my intentions are not strictly noble? And assuming they are, why shouldn't the CRAs delete! If my intentions are not noble, why should I scrutinize myself for the CRAs not doing their job to verify.
Nonetheless, I think we can all agree that there is quite the fine line between legality and ethics.