Sounds more like the National Socialists (i.e. NAZIs). Read more history.
In any case, the analogy is faulty.
Look. Any ethics enforcment group has a tough job. They have to recieve, review and adjudicate complaints. Most of these complaints are made as a result of rotten egg jelousy from other members who think they can get a leg up on the other guy, or are just feelin inadaquate because their work is falling off (either because of the market or because they are not getting business because they are not that good).
I have had, according to Joe F. “A whole lotta” ethics complaints “filed” against me. All investigated and dismissed. Most came from a former “highly placed” local NACHI member who got p_ssed off at me (and still won’t talk to me and explain why, which means that he is NOT interested in solving the problem, therefore is not to be taken seriously). But, even though I have his slanderous and stupid e-mails (provided to me by a fellow local member, not anyone on the ESOP (they shouldn’t do that, unethical)) and can prove this jerks vendetta, I will not name him nor post these e-mails. Why? Because the ESOP saw it for what it was and shut him down. I will not name him because it will serve no useful, or good, purpose. Let sleeping dogs lie (and lie).
Differences are best handles in private and not on this board.
The adult steps to take are:
- Talk (phone or in person) to the other guy and try to solve it. Most times, it’s just a simple misunderstanding.
- Talk to the guy with 2 or 3 un-biased witnesses.
- Only as a last resort, take the situation to the “Elders” (in this case, the ESOP) and let them decide.
When people waht to skip, right away, to #3, there is something wrong and they have an agenda.
When they want to make every little dispute public, they are not being adult, but just acting like spoiled brats.
And the best way to deal with spoiled brats is to give them a wack on their butt and ignore the tantrum.
This teaches them to behave like an adult.
Ethics boards have a responsibility to do their work confidentially, freely, speedily and fairly. That is the only way in which the stigma of innuendo and speculation can be avoided. Therefore, the discussion and determination have to be made privately. To publicize the mere alligation, publically, merely serves to “try the case in the arena of public opinon” rather than judiciously.
Look, it is no secret that I have differences with some members of the ESOP. I strongly disagree with some members who seem to post as if they have some “special power” or “authority” that they do not, or who post in “yelling fonts”. This is not good or seemly for those who were put in positions of responsibility.
But, I trust and respect the job that they have been assigned. I don’t have to like them, but I do trust them to be fair. Thankless job with only grief. Sometimes they fly off the handle, but, Danny, you do so as well, and with much less class than they do.
If you can come up with a fairer system, do so.