Case by case.

There are plenty of people who are clean (both in actions and convictions) that I would not hire EVER and vice versa. Its all case by case, and just another thing (however big) to consider when looking at bringing people on.

Especially in the early days it was easy for people to land themselves in hot water without any real malicious intent – especially when people were ‘young and stupid’ (or is that young and too smart for their own good ??). I’m not making excuses though, to take on the potential brand damage they would have to be able to add a hell of a lot to the mix.

@Dec,
I don’t mean to sound too prudish here or to moralise (too much!). But you’ve said it was easy in the early days for people to land themselves in hot water without “any real malicious intent”.

I’m curious about that comment. Surely most adults, even young & dumb-f&ck stupid ones, know the difference between right and wrong, especially those with perceived ‘higher’ skills associated with technology and hence, human intelligence.

It’s been said before, but I’ll say it again: In most States & Territories of Australia (& other countries), if someone is caught testing the locks on your house, or your car, without your permission, in most circumstances, these actions are against the law, and rightly so. The “intent” is irrelevant, as the mere actions of testing the locks is unlawful. In other words, society has said this is a bad thing. Similar laws exist in relation to people caught “testing” (hacking) computers & networks without permission, for any reason.

You often read & hear some people run the old argument that, as so-called white hats, and having no permission from the owner, they merely ‘test’ others’ systems, gaining access etc, and without any real malicious intent. Baloney. Try telling that to the Courts, you’ll quickly find they don’t accept this logic, and nor should they.

Having said all that, and from my own ethical perspective, I have no problem whatsoever with people who ‘test’ others systems, without permission, but only if that is the full extent of their activities. I do however have a problem with those who then boast about it, like they’ve won a trophy or for ‘cred’. But I digress, my ethics are irrelevant.

The moral is, if you get caught, be prepared to face the music, and don’t run the b-s line that you didn’t know it was wrong. Yes you did.

@the knucke
I agree. Well put!

Keep in mind some criminal ‘hacking’ activity is akin to a kid tagging someone’s fence with graffiti, or simply making a bad move because they were bored. They may have known the right and wrong about it, but have no concept of the ramifications of such childish antics, especially if no one is physically or financially burdened to excess.

For instance, what damage did the Twitter worm actually cause? It probably spent more collective money on the media attention than on anyone directly.

Nonetheless, there are situations where a kid does something relatively easy that simply results from being a kid. I don’t believe doing something wrong, no matter what it is or what age you are, means we can punish them for the rest of their life. If so, every offender may as well become a repeat/chronic offender.

(My stance is largely just a devil’s advocate stance, as I fall quite comfortably on both sides of this fence!)

Bah.
Someone flogged this debate topic from the back-end borb forum, posted it here on the front pages & effectively threw the blanket over any potential responses to *my* original debate. Talk about ripped off.

From bad to worse, then you get this bloke calling himself “The Knuckle” (above) who said everything I wanted to say, but he got in before I did (I reckon he stole my notes). There are egos to massage here, ya know. My writers union in Upper Botobolar will be made aware of these developments.
BG.

So, there was an opening for fresh new opinions, eh ?

Opinions are like r-soles. Everyone’s got one.