Comments (1)

Buradaki otomatik çevirileri Google Translate (Google Çeviri) yapmaktadır. Bu çeviriler size katılımcının söyledikleri hakkında genel bir fikir verecektir. Fakat bu çevirilerin doğruluğuna güvenilemez. Lütfen çevirileri bu notu aklınızda tutarak okuyunuz.

1. mnas May 28, 2012 at 10:29 pm
   replyLog in to Reply report Report comment

   Your comment is awaiting moderation.

   i think the meaning of reputation differs from country to country , from one economic status to the other and from one person’s perspective and understanding of the word to the other. A person’s reputation in a huge organization is calculated by how high up the hierarchy he/she is whereas reputation of the organization itself is perceived by how old the company is, the profits etc. Reputation in my country is measured by wealth and good connections. Instead of an increase in respect with a higher reputation, the interaction of the individuals becomes more complex and political which I believe is unavoidable. Taking an example of a person continuously working hard to achieve recognition and higher reputation in his job, his behavior and his interaction with his colleagues will become more political due to his instinct to protect his position that he had earned over the years. This is what I myself has observed in my own work environment.
2. jheawood February 2, 2012 at 11:38 am
   replyLog in to Reply report Report comment

   Reputation is what other people think about you. It’s inherently uncontrollable. You can have a ‘bad’ reputation in one era or society for something that is ‘good’ in another – a ‘fallen’ woman one day becomes a ‘liberated’ woman the next. English libel law treats anything that could damage your reputation as libellous – even if it might be true. A good libel law would focus on inaccuracy: is this story true or not? And does it cause serious and substantial harm? Claimants should have to show that a story is both false AND harmful before launching any action. http://www.libelreform.org