Jeff Ream Posted August 27, 2018 Share Posted August 27, 2018 1 minute ago, GUARDLING said: hmmm I would say most isn't..lol.. As I said there is no room for error, especially on this subject.. That goes for all sides right. As I said several posts ago, this can't be half ###ed. You cannot just get "volunteers" with no real training in the field to snoop around social media. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2000Cadet Posted August 27, 2018 Share Posted August 27, 2018 16 hours ago, cixelsyd said: I had no idea this question was going to be parsed so differently after it was answered. There have been several exclamations of this vague nature over social media. Like you, I suspect that even when a post spews the word "hate", it may just be symptomatic of momentary frustration with the latest news. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigW Posted August 27, 2018 Share Posted August 27, 2018 9 hours ago, jasgre2000 said: They were convicted of endangering children, not perjury. Partly because perjury is very difficult to get a conviction on, though to put it politely it's clear they at least somewhat prevaricated to the Grand Jury or were at best confused and gave incompetent responses . Regarding Curley and Schulz, charges of conspiracy etc. were dropped as part of a plea bargain. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jasgre2000 Posted August 28, 2018 Share Posted August 28, 2018 12 hours ago, Jeff Ream said: happens a lot because if just going on rumor, it could be viewed as slander/libel. In an investigation of any kind, people that get questioned leak. Word gets out. Boom Huh? That's just not true. An accusation has to be published for it to subject the accuser to liability for slander and libel. No one gets sued for defamation for investigating wrongdoing. What? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jasgre2000 Posted August 28, 2018 Share Posted August 28, 2018 (edited) 12 hours ago, Jeff Ream said: is everything you see on social media credible? No. I'm not talking about everything. But there are plenty of reports that are credible. The mods on Reddit actually do a pretty good job of verifying the identity of some of the people that have posted about stuff on there. Edited August 28, 2018 by jasgre2000 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluzes Posted August 28, 2018 Share Posted August 28, 2018 (edited) 14 hours ago, rpbobcat said: Absent that authority,I don't see corps directors ever agreeing to give up their control. Nor should they, been there a bunch of college boys come in with management software in hand. Count widgets and get some answers, usually the wrong answers. Management tells them the widgets don't where they need go fast enough. They have a chart for that. To Many widgets, not enough widgets. To to much OT. Business dynamics' roads they been down before. Bring them into the complexities of dci and they run out of charts, may need to think for themselves. Point is dci needs advice but giving them complete control is another thing. The scary part is there a firm out there that has the expertise to tackle this? Edited August 28, 2018 by Bluzes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted August 28, 2018 Share Posted August 28, 2018 2 hours ago, jasgre2000 said: I'm not talking about everything. But there are plenty of reports that are credible. The mods on Reddit actually do a pretty good job of verifying the identity of some of the people that have posted about stuff on there. if so, they wouldnt have gone out of their way to delete everything about the rumors about Hop for the 3 months prior to it coming out in the papers. The Reddit mods aren't infallable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jasgre2000 Posted August 28, 2018 Share Posted August 28, 2018 1 hour ago, Jeff Ream said: if so, they wouldnt have gone out of their way to delete everything about the rumors about Hop for the 3 months prior to it coming out in the papers. The Reddit mods aren't infallable. No one is infallable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted August 28, 2018 Share Posted August 28, 2018 5 hours ago, jasgre2000 said: No one is infallable. No but there’s no need for putting the Reddit mods up as a paragon of virtue, because they e proven otherwise. If any of the stuff out now came out about the Cadets or YEA prior to April they couldn’t kill it fast enough Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xandandl Posted August 28, 2018 Share Posted August 28, 2018 (edited) 10 hours ago, jasgre2000 said: Huh? That's just not true. An accusation has to be published for it to subject the accuser to liability for slander and libel. No one gets sued for defamation for investigating wrongdoing. What? slander is what is said. Libel is what is written. Postings on the internet... Edited August 28, 2018 by xandandl Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts