[Foundation-l] Mission & Vision statement updated

Rich Holton richholton at gmail.com
Sat Apr 28 00:56:07 UTC 2007

Thomas Dalton wrote:
>> Huh?
>> Why would making this decision based on values make "it" not work? Or
>> are you meaning that the values should be objectively defined and evaluated?
> Not everyone's values are the same, that's why it wouldn't work.
>> "Emphysema patients are more deserving of charitable assistance than
>> caviar-less aristocrats." is a statement of values.
>> "Caviar is defined as a luxury, and an organization dedicated to
>> providing it does not qualify for charitable status." is a value-based
>> statement that is objectively applicable.
> Defined as a luxury by whom? What you consider a luxury generally
> depends on your standard of living. For many people in the world, a
> car is a luxury, for a typical westerner, it's considered a necessity.

But nothing you've said has any bearing on it working. You, based on 
your values, may not *like* how it works. But it would work just fine. 
You're confusing what you'd like with what actually works.

If you really think there are *any* important decisions that are made 
devoid of values, you are hugely mistaken.


More information about the foundation-l mailing list