Re: Fully open operation

2009-01-27 Thread Ian G
Hi Ben, There is a danger in editing out the subtleties, and then discovering it says what we want :) That "..." is significant! On 27/1/09 11:45, Ben Bucksch wrote: On 14.01.2009 18:49, Ian G wrote: In _Rampell_ [2]: "... Those audits are relied on not only by the clients on whose financia

Re: Fully open operation

2009-01-27 Thread Ben Bucksch
On 14.01.2009 18:49, Ian G wrote: In _Rampell_ [2]: "... Those audits are relied on not only by the clients on whose financial matters audits are performed but upon a host of other individuals and entities who may rely on the information in making their own economic decisions. Audited statemen

Re: Fully open operation

2009-01-14 Thread Michael Ströder
Ian G wrote: > On 14/1/09 15:35, Michael Ströder wrote: >> David E. Ross wrote: >>> On 1/3/2009 6:51 PM, Ian G wrote: It was written: > But aren't auditors the eye of the public performing and recording > those > operations? That's one theory. Here is another: Who is the cli

Re: Fully open operation

2009-01-14 Thread Ian G
On 14/1/09 15:35, Michael Ströder wrote: David E. Ross wrote: On 1/3/2009 6:51 PM, Ian G wrote: It was written: But aren't auditors the eye of the public performing and recording those operations? That's one theory. Here is another: Who is the client of the auditor? The auditor has a dut

Re: Fully open operation

2009-01-14 Thread Michael Ströder
David E. Ross wrote: > On 1/3/2009 6:51 PM, Ian G wrote: >> It was written: >>> But aren't auditors the eye of the public performing and recording those >>> operations? >> >> That's one theory. Here is another: Who is the client of the auditor? >> The auditor has a duty to the client that (arg

Re: Fully open operation

2009-01-04 Thread Ben Bucksch
On 04.01.2009 19:54, David E. Ross wrote: The line from auditor to the public has been drawn in the courts, where lawsuits against auditors by investors injured by corporate fraud have been successful. Yes. But as Ian pointed out, and you can see in the audit documents, e.g.

Re: Fully open operation

2009-01-04 Thread David E. Ross
On 1/3/2009 6:51 PM, Ian G wrote: > It was written: >> But aren't auditors the eye of the public performing and recording those >> operations? > > > That's one theory. Here is another: Who is the client of the auditor? > The auditor has a duty to the client that (arguably) outweighs the > d

Re: Fully open operation

2009-01-03 Thread Ian G
It was written: But aren't auditors the eye of the public performing and recording those operations? That's one theory. Here is another: Who is the client of the auditor? The auditor has a duty to the client that (arguably) outweighs the duty to anyone else. You might not agree to the a

Re: Fully open operation

2009-01-03 Thread Eddy Nigg
On 01/03/2009 06:32 PM, Ben Bucksch: Well, I think this might be a good idea, though. I could even go so far as to demand that all operations of the CA, including all processes in all detail, and the actual day-to-day operations, need to be open to everybody, both over the Internet and in real li