Yeah, but if you're freelancing for someone,
you're actually doing work for the person asking and it would be a bit difficult to earn anything without some level of discussion about money.
But that reporter (and people on b3ta) are not asking this guy to do work for them.
"It shouldn't be rude." Yeah but it *is* considered rude by most people.
And there are good reasons why. One of them is the same reason why lottery winners often remain anonymous, to avoid a constant stream of beggars. Or to avoid con men from identifying you as a target. Or to avoid the situation where groups of envious cunts whip themselves into a frenzy online about how evil you are.
(, Sun 21 Oct 2018, 19:13, Share, Reply)
It can be rude asking how much someone earns...
But he isn't at a party talking to someone he has just met, he is a journalist and it is his job. He does not have to justify the question to someone he is interviewing.
Also, they are not exempt because of the LACK of a law to exempt them.
(
The_cold_stare Coming here only when very, very bored, Sun 21 Oct 2018, 20:27,
Share,
Reply)
I didn't require the journalist to justify his question.
I'm pointing out that this guy has no duty to answer it, needs no justification for his lack of answer, and is being treated quite unfairly for a guy who appears to have done nothing wrong apart from earning more money than some people would like him to earn.
In your last sentence are you saying that things aren't against a law if the law doesn't exist?
(, Sun 21 Oct 2018, 21:32, Share, Reply)
No
Are you saying that if something isn't written into law it is automatically protected?
(
The_cold_stare Coming here only when very, very bored, Mon 22 Oct 2018, 15:28,
Share,
Reply)
No not at all...
I'm not quite sure what you're getting at.
My position is that the guy has not apparently committed any crime, has not mismanaged the company he works for, and has been remunerated according to the contract he has with that company upon which the shareholders will have signed off. He doesn't appear to be going around being an utter bastard to people. He doesn't appear to have done anything wrong that anyone can point at.
The only thing he has done is earn more money than some other people would like, and refuse to answer a question about that. According to some people that's despicable, with no clear explanation of why (the closest anyone came to an explanation involved some waffle about A-level sociology).
In terms of the law, he is protected in the sense that he is not obliged to answer any of those journalists questions, just as the journalist is protected in being allowed to ask them. He can not be prosecuted or sued for not answering them. This isn't really a question of law, other than the fact he has not apparently broken it.
(, Mon 22 Oct 2018, 20:49, Share, Reply)
He doesn't have to answer the question
He isn't covered by a law that states that he doesn't have to answer the question though. So he is not exempt from answering it as you put it. That's what I am saying.
Other than that, as I said before, the journalist can ask what he wants. The assumption that everyone is a nosy, envious twat because we believe these corporations should be transparent, accountable and answerable is a bit much.
(
The_cold_stare Coming here only when very, very bored, Tue 23 Oct 2018, 0:47,
Share,
Reply)