Malcolm Douglas,

My rant was not based on any knowledge I have of Kennedy's practices.

The last sentence in my post was improperly worded.

I should have said
"If the allegations are true, I personally am appalled by Kennedy's disrespect for his sources."

For the mis-statement I apologize.

However...

My rant was a general criticism of discussions of this type.

It was prompted by my interpretation of the remarks of some of Kennedy's "defenders."

I respect those who defend Kennedy along the lines of "Based upon my own experience and to the best of my knowledge Kennedy is not guilty."

What set me off were those who appear to be defending Kennedy along the lines of "no blood, no foul."
Some participants appeared to suggest that so little money was involved the issue is hardly worth worrying about, and as if that were the only significant factor.

My point
If guilt is eventually proven or admitted,
and if we are comparing the pros and cons of Kennedy's efforts,
Then we don't simply ask accountants to furnish us with balance sheets.
We don't simply ask other appropriately credentialed collectors to evaluate this methodology.
We should take a serious look at the impact of blameworthy practices on the individuals and traditions involved.
IMHO the last would be the most significant factor.

Russ (Permanent GUEST)