B
Big Gain
Posts: 2,073
Nov 12, 2011 11:59pm
Dunce, Curley cannot be fired until his trial is over e is a current full time permanent employee. PSU could be sued if they fired him before his trial. Guilty or innocent, when the trial is over he WILL be fired. The reason Schultz was dismissed immediately instead of waiting until his trial has concluded is because he was an interim employee. There are MANY MANY people who have not been fired yet that WILL be fired.Skyhook79;970241 wrote:Are you also having trouble with "Has been fired" vs "will be fired"?
Skyhook79
Posts: 5,739
Nov 13, 2011 12:05am
"A basic example of the hindsight bias is when, after viewing the outcome of a potentially unforeseeable event, a person believes he or she "knew it all along."Big Gain;970261 wrote:YES indeed, a PERFECTLY chosen word by Paterno. Hindsight - Bias, or alternatively the knew-it-all-along effect.
When Paterno claim he knew it all along?
B
Big Gain
Posts: 2,073
Nov 13, 2011 12:07am
Yep, dotting their Is crossing their Ts. The justice system is not a speeding locomotive. You have one shot, you must get it right the first time.Skyhook79;970210 wrote:Well why didn't you tell me earlier one of your good friends whose ex-wife went to Penn State knows what happened and what JoePa's defense team defense plan is even though no one ever testified to JoePa stopped McQuaery even McQuaery himself. /sarcasm
Prosecutors are so good that after the GJ testimony it still took them 11 months to arrest Jerry Sandusky, a supposed serial rapist.
B
Big Gain
Posts: 2,073
Nov 13, 2011 12:10am
When the house of cards began to crumble. And there was no lie that would suffice.Skyhook79;970278 wrote:"A basic example of the hindsight bias is when, after viewing the outcome of a potentially unforeseeable event, a person believes he or she "knew it all along."
When Paterno claim he knew it all along?
Skyhook79
Posts: 5,739
Nov 13, 2011 12:22am
How many more kids were at risk while they were supposedly dotting their I's and crossing their T's? Casey Anthony spent 3 years in jail before her trial, they would have plenty of time crossing their I's and T's while Sandusky sat in jail awaiting trial.Big Gain;970280 wrote:Yep, dotting their Is crossing their Ts. The justice system is not a speeding locomotive. You have one shot, you must get it right the first time.
B
Big Gain
Posts: 2,073
Nov 13, 2011 12:33am
Yep, the justice system doesn't care about children any more than Paterno did.
TAKE YOUR TEST. 1) Moral 2) Amoral
TAKE YOUR TEST. 1) Moral 2) Amoral
M
Manhattan Buckeye
Posts: 7,566
Nov 13, 2011 12:44am
This makes less sense than the post I referred to earlier.Skyhook79;970301 wrote:How many more kids were at risk while they were supposedly dotting their I's and crossing their T's? Casey Anthony spent 3 years in jail before her trial, they would have plenty of time crossing their I's and T's while Sandusky sat in jail awaiting trial.
Victim 1 was identified in '08, Sandusky knew he was under investigation at that time.
Writerbuckeye
Posts: 4,745
Nov 13, 2011 12:27pm
In this case, you bet your ass. Sometimes, you have a moral obligation that goes beyond doing the minimal. Paterno may have met his legal obligation, but he failed miserably when it comes to being a moral human being, not to mention a leader.Skyhook79;970060 wrote:Following the law is the path of least resistance and opposite of the correct action?
Skyhook79
Posts: 5,739
Nov 13, 2011 1:46pm
Who decides who is a moral human being? You? your neighbor? The President? Congress? Judge? Everyone has an opinion on what is moral behavior.Writerbuckeye;970675 wrote:In this case, you bet your ass. Sometimes, you have a moral obligation that goes beyond doing the minimal. Paterno may have met his legal obligation, but he failed miserably when it comes to being a moral human being, not to mention a leader.
dwccrew
Posts: 7,817
Nov 13, 2011 1:47pm
The BoT at PSU decided Joe Pa wasn't moral and canned his old ass.Skyhook79;970806 wrote:Who decides who is a moral human being? You? your neighbor? The President? Congress? Judge? Everyone has an opinion on what is moral behavior.
Skyhook79
Posts: 5,739
Nov 13, 2011 1:51pm
dwccrew;970812 wrote:The BoT at PSU decided Joe Pa wasn't moral and canned his old ass.
Is this the same BOT that gave Jerry Sandusky emeritus status even after they knew he was investigated in 1998? They are the ones determining morals of another person?
B
bigkahuna
Posts: 4,454
Nov 13, 2011 2:02pm
This has been stated several times and a is a very valid point.Skyhook79;970817 wrote:Is this the same BOT that gave Jerry Sandusky emeritus status even after they knew he was investigated in 1998? They are the ones determining morals of another person?
dwccrew
Posts: 7,817
Nov 13, 2011 2:05pm
No, board members have come and gone. I'm sure there is still a few that were on the board that gave Sandusky emeritus status, but it is not the same board. Nice try though.Skyhook79;970817 wrote:Is this the same BOT that gave Jerry Sandusky emeritus status even after they knew he was investigated in 1998? They are the ones determining morals of another person?
B
bigkahuna
Posts: 4,454
Nov 13, 2011 2:10pm
I wonder if there is a way to find this out... timeline of the BoTdwccrew;970858 wrote:No, board members have come and gone. I'm sure there is still a few that were on the board that gave Sandusky emeritus status, but it is not the same board. Nice try though.
Skyhook79
Posts: 5,739
Nov 13, 2011 2:42pm
Whether its a few or not makes no difference. What about after 2002 incident or 2008 when Sandusky was under investigation? They could have revoked his status at any point. I wonder if they have even revoked them as of now.dwccrew;970858 wrote:No, board members have come and gone. I'm sure there is still a few that were on the board that gave Sandusky emeritus status, but it is not the same board. Nice try though.
dwccrew
Posts: 7,817
Nov 13, 2011 6:11pm
It does make a difference. You asked if it is the same board that gave Sandusky emeritus status is the same board that fired Paterno. They are not the same board as there some different members on the board now.Skyhook79;970925 wrote:Whether its a few or not makes no difference. What about after 2002 incident or 2008 when Sandusky was under investigation? They could have revoked his status at any point. I wonder if they have even revoked them as of now.
Just as Congress is considered a different Congress when new members are elected, the board is also considered a different board when new members are added.
B
Big Gain
Posts: 2,073
Nov 13, 2011 7:06pm
I gave you the chance to "decide". Is Paterno 1) Moral or 2) Amoral.... You refuse to step forward and take the test. Not answering is a FAIL.Skyhook79;970806 wrote:Who decides who is a moral human being? You? your neighbor? The President? Congress? Judge? Everyone has an opinion on what is moral behavior.
D
dat dude
Posts: 1,564
Nov 13, 2011 7:32pm
[video=youtube;jMIT3cNrUxg][/video]
Thought this was appropriate.
Thought this was appropriate.
Skyhook79
Posts: 5,739
Nov 13, 2011 8:47pm
There is only one person qualified to make morality judgements on people and you are not that person. Make judgements about your own morality not others.Big Gain;971597 wrote:I gave you the chance to "decide". Is Paterno 1) Moral or 2) Amoral.... You refuse to step forward and take the test. Not answering is a FAIL.
Writerbuckeye
Posts: 4,745
Nov 13, 2011 9:01pm
It's a public discussion board, so me. I get to decide. When I read that he ignored something sexual happening to a child and did the very least thing he could do and, as a result, more children ended up getting molested -- I get to decide that Paterno is morally bankrupt.Skyhook79;970806 wrote:Who decides who is a moral human being? You? your neighbor? The President? Congress? Judge? Everyone has an opinion on what is moral behavior.
And given that Paterno is no longer a PSU employee, I can be pretty sure the Board of Trustees agrees with me, as likely do the majority of people who have read the details of this case.
W
WebFire
Posts: 14,779
Nov 13, 2011 9:04pm
Way to skirt around the question. :rolleyes:Skyhook79;971797 wrote:There is only one person qualified to make morality judgements on people and you are not that person. Make judgements about your own morality not others.
DeyDurkie5
Posts: 11,324
Nov 13, 2011 9:07pm
who is that person?Skyhook79;971797 wrote:There is only one person qualified to make morality judgements on people and you are not that person. Make judgements about your own morality not others.
reclegend22
Posts: 8,772
Nov 13, 2011 9:35pm
I would guess he was referring to God, and that would be correct.
DeyDurkie5
Posts: 11,324
Nov 13, 2011 9:38pm
I didn't know they were living persons able to make that decisionreclegend22;971860 wrote:I would guess he was referring to God, and that would be correct.
E
enigmaax
Posts: 4,511
Nov 14, 2011 7:14am
I know, right? I wish they'd hurry up and ask Tim Tebow his opinion.Skyhook79;971797 wrote:There is only one person qualified to make morality judgements on people and you are not that person.