The structure of The Good Decision relies heavily on an assumoption of the goodness of human beings, but that assumption alone can be dangerously naive. For the purposes of The Good Decision (TGD) process I am  trying to address that risk in the scope of considerations for the diversity of ‘good’ and would appreciate your feed back on this post.  Is there a line not to cross  in your Sense of Good in the context of TGD?  Are there places your Sense of Good or your community’s Sense of Good  could go in the name of good that simply are not good but rather harmful.  Does this website have a morality or ethical code that describes  limits to our understanding of ‘good’?  As the author of this website I have felt I had the  responsibility to to publish limits beyond which  I could not condone in the practice of the Sense of Good in the name of The Good Decision.  The answer is short and it falls back on the age-tested ethical prescription: “Do No Harm”.  The language below has been added to the introduction of the TGD process  and I would be interested in your feedback and recommendations.

Do No Harm and The Good Decision
The contemplation of an action or option that would harm another human being regardless of race, color, ethnicity, religion, or gender falls outside of the realm of the good in the context of The Good Decision (TGD). Life is full of ambiguous decisions for first responders, medical practitioners, armed service men and women, and service providers in general.  There  is however  a difference between complex, difficult decisions and the conscious contemplation of harm. TGD is designed specifically to assist in those complex, difficult and ambiguous service decisions. There are however organizations and persons in our culture that would use your Sense of Good to recruit you and your capacity to decide into harmful activity.  Do No Harm