Which is worse...

[Iraqgunz]

rob_s,

Is there a particular company in mind? BTW- I have yet to receive a response from Les Baer concerning their backwards castle nut.

[mmike87]

Idiots can at least be trusted for some things (I.E.: To make the same mistakes as they did before).

Does that mean all politicians are idiots and not liars!

Which is worse, for them to have been intentionally using inferior materials to save a buck of for them to have been so ignorant of their industry that they didn't know their materials were inferior?

I'd say it's worse to intentionally use inferior materials to save a buck. It's the intent that makes the difference - in the former circumstance, the company is intentionally putting people at risk, and they know so. In the latter case, they are just lacking the appropriate knowledge, but could still have good intentions.

[Gutshot John]

In manufacturing there is always going to be an "acceptable" percentage of failure. Invariably manufacturers use the cheapest raw material that will yield the appropriate percentage. Does it become cheaper to just replace the Xboxes that have problems? Is that stupid? dishonest? I don't know enough about it, but the Xbox is usually not a piece of lifesaving technology and can be easily replaced.

In the case of body armor, both stupidity and dishonesty are fatal, and when lives are on the line, there is a place for NEITHER flaw. The only difference is intent, the result is the same. A human life cannot be replaced. Lying about the safety of such a product is criminal, being ignorant of it is not.

[RogerinTPA]

Another recent (past few weeks) example of dishonest business practices would be the peanut butter company in GA which knew part of there product was tainted with salmonella and shipped anyway, killing and sickening hundreds of people throughout the country. I through everything that had peanut butter ingredience in the garbage when I found out. The president of that place should be publicly beheaded.

[CDDM416]

is this another"game for all ages"?

[Abraxas]

...being an idiot or being a liar?

Liar, hands down.

[CarlosDJackal]

Which make them trustworth and dependable. Also, idiots are NOT predictable.

This is causing some reflective and deep responses. I have a feeling rob is going to come out with a fart joke and have us all.

LOL. But can someone who can be counted on to consistently lie really be considered trustworthy or dependable?

How about someone who can be counted on to screw-up every time; can they also be considered trustworthy or dependable?

[theJanitor]

Lying about the safety of such a product is criminal, being ignorant of it is not.

although, if the correct information is current and available; ignorance becomes negligence. and it could be criminally negligent.

edit: i do not know about the SECOND CHANCE issue to imply negligence on their behalf.

[Gutshot John]

although, if the correct information is current and available; ignorance becomes negligence. and it could be criminally negligent.

I agree completely.

[rob_s]

although, if the correct information is current and available; ignorance becomes negligence. and it could be criminally negligent.

Kind of my thought as well. If the resources to get educated are available and someone chooses to remain ignorant, at a certain point it becomes willful stupidity.

This is different than a company accidentally shipping a product with a unit-, or run-, specific error. QC or QA mistakes happen and do not automatically indicate stupid.