| From: | "Paul J. Adam" <paul@********.demon.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: Killing in Shadowrun... |
| Date: | Mon, 20 May 1996 17:42:54 +0100 |
<topcat@******.net> writes
>Impressive security measures are much cheaper than you think. Especially to
>a megacorp which can throw off a few million without any real care. Plus,
>you can never have enough security in the eyes of the shareholders.
>Skimping there could cost you without the defenses ever having been tried.
You *can* have too much security, just as you can have too much
management... it's an overhead that doesn't bring in a return.
Shareholders might start muttering about all that money sunk for no
tangible gain...
>If I ran a corp and I knew of a team that nailed my corp, I'd hire them, set
>them up, and kill them. Since it is 2057 and not 1057, I couldn't put their
>heads on poles outside the office complex, but I could get some nice
>pictures taken and set up a story for the papers. The more of those stories
>that show up, the less likely subsequent attacks will be on the corp.
It also means nobody will work for you.
Your competitors can hire runners and you can't. This is not a good
thing: they now have an advantage in the end.
>Ruling through fear is much easier than ruling through trust and far less
>likely to hurt you in the end.
That's questionable. A ruthless kill-em-all corporation is going to have
a lot of incidental losses: it becomes a matter of survival to damage it
as much as possible.
"There are four kinds of homicide: felonious, excusable, justifiable and
praiseworthy."
Ambrose Bierce, "The Devil's Dictionary"
Paul J. Adam paul@********.demon.co.uk
