jeffmolnar Posted January 19, 2019 Share Posted January 19, 2019 13 hours ago, Jeff Ream said: I don't support Dan and I've called for his head. I keep pointing it out to you because maybe, just maybe, you'll realize "we live in a world that has rules son". There are several laws in our country i think are ####### stupid, but i also know...they're the law, can't do a ###### thing about it. ...if you've actually been reading anything I've posted, you'd know that realizing there is a rule and supporting that rule are entirely different things. This is a discussion forum here people share their opinions. Your "can't do a ###### thing about it" is a defeatist attitude that I do not share. In any case, this precious little rule that you worship so highly did not dictate that Dan had to cancel Arsenal's open class application. Dan decided that on his own. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barneveld Posted January 19, 2019 Share Posted January 19, 2019 18 minutes ago, Stu said: I could be in error, but I think I have read in a few posts that Lotz apparently posted the personal email exchanges of either Dave or Dan to a public forum. If that is factual, would somebody please provide actual verification. He included 2 emails (one from Dan, one from Dave) in a Facebook post he made on January 16th at 11:55am. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weaklefthand4ever Posted January 19, 2019 Share Posted January 19, 2019 2 hours ago, Jeff Ream said: he said he would...then changed his mind. that's not willing to work with them My only "hitch in the giddy-up" to that would be the portion where DCI states they gave an opportunity to correct and Arsenals former director/ceo states no such activity occurred. Now this is based on IF, in fact, that statement holds water. If it does, then although I would agree that taking proactive action to remove the post would have been prudent, why would he remove it if he wasn't specifically indicated to do so especially if the conditions for "correcting the issue" were not lain out? I guess I just look at it from the perspective of managing a different type of business. In my world, if I tell you that something is egregiously wrong and that you need to take corrective action, I HAVE to tell you what that action needs to be (or at least how to start the process.) If that isn't done, then both employee and leader are spinning their wheels. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skevinp Posted January 19, 2019 Share Posted January 19, 2019 1 minute ago, Barneveld said: He included 2 emails (one from Dan, one from Dave) in a Facebook post he made on January 16th at 11:55am. Was he not the recipient of those emails? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluzes Posted January 19, 2019 Share Posted January 19, 2019 1 minute ago, MikeD said: I was commenting on your post that mentioned civil suits. If Lotz admits he was wrong, a I am passed all that but am stuck on how the punishment fits the crime on Mr. Lotz. I am also stumped why defending dciDan now is important? A dumpster fire erupted into the house burning down. Where is the 20/20 hindsight focused other than dci policy? It was too vague and resulted in good intentions turning bad. They admit that in their statement where they said the policy will be reviewed and improved upon. Dci decisions/action are not above scrutiny and dci has liability to the damage it causes and has insurance. Your statements are appreciated but way off base about civil liability. In a parallel universe any knowledgeable person on DCP could be in his place. Under King Dan he decides who's head he wants on his plate. We are all just as guilty. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barneveld Posted January 19, 2019 Share Posted January 19, 2019 2 minutes ago, skevinp said: Was he not the recipient of those emails? Stu asked someone to confirm if emails were posted. I told him where I saw them. It's not for me to decide if he was right or wrong in posting them. I was only providing info. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted January 19, 2019 Share Posted January 19, 2019 5 minutes ago, skevinp said: Was he not the recipient of those emails? Yes; but they were private communication and not intended for public consumption. If he posted them for the public to see without permission from the other party that is breaking huge business protocol and in most careers a fireable offense. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimF-LowBari Posted January 19, 2019 Share Posted January 19, 2019 1 minute ago, Stu said: Yes; but they were private communication and not intended for public consumption. If he posted them for the public to see without permission from the other party that is breaking huge business protocol and in most careers a fireable offense. Believe someone who read them said phone numbers and/or email addresses that were not meant for the public were in the fb posts in the clear. IMO posting private conversation without permission is a great way to lose trust Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barneveld Posted January 19, 2019 Share Posted January 19, 2019 5 minutes ago, JimF-LowBari said: Believe someone who read them said phone numbers and/or email addresses that were not meant for the public were in the fb posts in the clear. IMO posting private conversation without permission is a great way to lose trust I just looked. There are phone numbers clearly visible. I didn't see any email addresses listed. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted January 19, 2019 Share Posted January 19, 2019 2 hours ago, Bluzes said: You are missing the point what Dan did over a little hissy fit for his own satisfaction. Dan's frontier justice will affect this mans ability to make it through any future vetting for life. His digital footprint associates him in future background checks for HR A.I software to place him in the do not hire category forever, no question of this. We proved it last night we didn't even need to go any deeper than placing his name in google and it says he resigned in the hit piece along with GH and AI puts all this together and places his resume in the trash bin, hope dci is proud of themselves. Sure. Whatever you say Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.