Ethics Question

Is it recommended to prohibit contact with Investment Banking, make larger efforts to prevent the flow of information or was their policy sufficient as it was?

this was one of the ethics q’s that i debated back and forth in my mind about 100 times. it was info flow and then using extreme caution w/ info. i wound up going no violation b/c the flow of info was through one compliance officer which seemed ok to me, it was more the extreme caution side that was making me crazy. perhaps it is a violation and it should read NEVER… but that seemed extreme- there are times when people must speak- extreme caution seemed severe enough to me. i’m prob a -1 on this one. i put no violation on the policy itself.

I think it is a violation . . . just because compliance says its not a violation doesn’t mean it is ok

or does it ? that is the question :wink:

They needed to do a better job of restricting flow of information. A correct code also places limits on discussing insider information in public areas INSIDE the workplace. Better question: Can he send factual info to investing banking group?

Has to go through compliance officer. Can share factual information though. This one I know for sure.

What was it asking again?

They were asking what was missing from their current policy on MNP Information.

bannisja Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > this was one of the ethics q’s that i debated back > and forth in my mind about 100 times. it was info > flow and then using extreme caution w/ info. i > wound up going no violation b/c the flow of info > was through one compliance officer which seemed ok > to me, it was more the extreme caution side that > was making me crazy. perhaps it is a violation > and it should read NEVER… but that seemed > extreme- there are times when people must speak- > extreme caution seemed severe enough to me. i’m > prob a -1 on this one. i put no violation on the > policy itself. God, you are soooooo wrong on this.

i think we are all talking about 2 diff questions here . . . OP is talking about a diff. one than banni i think

I think flow is right. Page 40 of ethics book.

That’s what I put I believe… yessss

“bannisja Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > this was one of the ethics q’s that i debated back > and forth in my mind about 100 times. it was info > flow and then using extreme caution w/ info. i > wound up going no violation b/c the flow of info > was through one compliance officer which seemed ok > to me, it was more the extreme caution side that > was making me crazy. perhaps it is a violation > and it should read NEVER… but that seemed > extreme- there are times when people must speak- > extreme caution seemed severe enough to me. i’m > prob a -1 on this one. i put no violation on the > policy itself. God, you are soooooo wrong on this.” Don’t be a phucking prick - you haven’t earned that right.

i gave myself the -1 spongey. at least i don’t live in the granite state, sucka. :slight_smile:

I like the sound of giving you the spongey…:slight_smile:

skillz- he’s earned it. we’re tight, it’s cool.

on the other q, agree it was factual info only is ok.

Lol, my burst…thought he was being a prick for no apparent reason - my apologies to the both of you.

skillionaire Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > “bannisja Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > this was one of the ethics q’s that i debated > back > > and forth in my mind about 100 times. it was > info > > flow and then using extreme caution w/ info. i > > wound up going no violation b/c the flow of info > > > was through one compliance officer which seemed > ok > > to me, it was more the extreme caution side that > > > was making me crazy. perhaps it is a violation > > and it should read NEVER… but that seemed > > extreme- there are times when people must speak- > > > extreme caution seemed severe enough to me. i’m > > > prob a -1 on this one. i put no violation on the > > > policy itself. > > God, you are soooooo wrong on this.” > > Don’t be a phucking prick - you haven’t earned > that right. They say this cat Shaft is a bad mother SHUT YOUR MOUTH!

Relax, already apologized - my bads.