@kjayhawks said in Mike Gundy and OSU:
@Crimsonorblue22 @mayjay is it fake? It’s on ESPN. @Texas-Hawk-10 I agree with your assessment.
I think the link you posted must have gotten redirected. When I clicked on it, there was nothing about Gottlieb, just the true story about their actual discussions. (Try it, it must have been changed!) I thought you invented the fake list, and Crimson called it a joke but I thought she meant by you. Sorry about the misunderstanding.
He needs to talk to Scott Pollard!
@kjayhawks Classy, real classy, to devalue what the players are actually protesting about.
A succinct summary of some of the cases giving rise to the current protests:
@Crimsonorblue22 His feeling of vulnerability while waiting for backup unfortunately kept the situation highly charged because he kept his weapon out without any explanation, and it looked like if the kids made a mistake by moving improperly another tragedy would have occurred. A good reason cops should not patrol alone.
@kjayhawks I don't think so. This version came out after all the angry posts reacting to the bystanders' video. The police released their version quickly. But the media there published it quickly, too. I see no manipulation by the media. This story was driven by social media.
In the past, police never felt much need to give their version, and if a video was provided it was often delayed for months and edited. Only with the prevalence of cell phone cameras have we started seeing versions other than the official ones.
The media are not at fault for the suspicions of the police. That is on the cops, the prosecutors, and police unions that reflexively protect even murderous cops
@Crimsonorblue22 Another version, if accurate, might give context to why the officer took the approach he did:
@kjayhawks That is the article I referenced as using the satire about Paw Patrol to attack TV cop dramas (and Brooklyn 99 for that matter). She does NOT say PP is cancelled.
@nuleafjhawk Married out of one crooked family to the son of a felon. The corrupt class sticks together.
Also:
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/did-paw-patrol-get-canceled/ ↗
Surprise, Eric Trump & Dana Loesch are another source of the false rumor.
@kjayhawks Like most things that create such reactions by Ted Cruz and company, the Paw Patrol cancellation is manufactured speculation. It is based on a NYT critic's recounting of satirical comments made on the show's website (the cop puppy is a "species traitor"?). She used those as a way to launch into a larger attack on TV cop shows (her commentary is a whole different level of overwrought, IMO). There is no announced plan to cancel it, and it did just get renewed.
https://decider.com/2020/06/11/is-paw-patrol-being-cancelled-protests/ ↗
@nuleafjhawk I made that mistake during an atypical downturn in diatribe production. Then it all started again.
If "Memory Wipe" were an option, we could forget those mistakes we made.
It will be interesting if the NCAA tries to argue that since consenting to the non-appealable alternate panel is voluntary, it is akin to private arbitration. Most attempts to seek review of arbitration are fruitless under the American Arbitration Act, even if a party unilaterally tries to "reserve" their right to seek redress to the courts. But arbitration agreements are explicit in what rights they waive. I still doubt that courts would enforce the "no recourse" provision when faced with gross procedural violations (e.g., NCAA not adhering to their own rules) or manifest injustice.
What a relief. Try it, you'll like it!
Maybe we all have gottten stuck in an alternate universe run by The Onion.
@kjayhawks I agree it doesn't seem logical, but think of how many people you might have seen wearing sweats on summer runs. And actually I am in SC!
@kjayhawks said in Racial Truths and Untruths and the Search for Justice while Doing Justice (previously titled To Infinity and Beyond):
the point went light years over your head. No people don’t typically don’t go jogging in cargo shorts, to say otherwise is a lie
Maybe you need to live in a different place. Incidentally, I wasn't lying but I can see why I only now remembered why discussing something with you is difficult. Disagree or different experiences=stupid or lying.
"Analysis: Why the call to defund police is music to Trump's ears"
https://www.cnn.com/2020/06/08/politics/defund-the-police-blm/index.html ↗
@kjayhawks I have seen many people jogging in cargo pants and cargo shorts, particularly people of color.
And if you read the testimony at the hearing last week you will see that the 3 assailants literally chased him while he was running, bumping him with a truck and finally cornering him. There is no adequate word for it other than hunting.
@benshawks08 I believe the idea of any community suddenly deciding to devote funds to a wholesale approach to community support (catch-all phrase), while revamping police depts, is a dream only. Every antitax nut will use defunding police as a way of advancing extremist no-government and will insist on taxes being cut instead of devoting funds to alternate uses.
The most immediate result, I fear, is one that the people seeking it have not contemplated and will abhor: I predict the single greatest explosion in private gun ownership in our nation's history.
Defunding might work in gun-free societies. That is not the US.
@benshawks08 said:
...jogging while black is not trespassing. But good to know where you stand on that.
C'mon, don't start looking for gotchas when you guys are arguing means while trying to attain common goals. The background of that Georgia incident involved reports of trespassing and burglary in the house being built, and videos are online that appear to show murder victim on site on prior days. But no one here said he deserved it because of trespassing. The concern raised was how vigilantes, if no police exist, would react to even simple trespass by going nuclear as happened to that poor guy.
Avoiding nut picking is impossible when 85% of the right wing R'pubs approve of the greatest nut of all.
Frankly, I believe that all opinions are equally deserving of deep examination and discussion. Science is obviously a left-wing conspiracy designed to turn man against God, and fortunately anyone seeking knowledge has been persecuted since time immemorial. Our brains are only here to fill a vacant place in the skull.
On a happier note, Pat Robertson, James Matthis, and George Will have all come out severely critical of the Orange Man (sorry for the association, Syracuse, you should have a better name anyway). And it still has little effect on Rush, Sean, Pompousass, Dr. Jeanne Pinhead, or the Even More Deplorables. Sigh....
@Texas-Hawk-10 Doesn't KU have to consent to the unappealable procedure featuring Dick Tracy & Co? What is the advantage, since they are free to go beyod the NCAA charges?
@Texas-Hawk-10 Saying NCSt's case is the same as KU's ignores a major difference: an assistant coach at NCSt was the middleman in funneling the money. KU's coaches are not alleged to have ever touched or been actually aware of any payments.
There is substantial room for a decision-maker to distinguish the two situations.
@bcjayhawk said in Differentiating fact from opinion on COVID-19:
"When I was little, my parents didn't tolerate lying and name calling...."
I told my stepsons, after several rounds of their dismayingly miserable failures at deception, that honesty was the best policy for people who are as bad as they were at lying. Example: older son sneaking out bedroom window after leaving pillows in his bed under the blankets to look like he was asleep. Weak strategy:
"How did you know I was gone?"
"Well, Joe, you locked the door and wouldn't answer, so I kicked it down."
"Yeah, I wondered if that was a good move."
"Joe, me lad, th' life of crime is nae fer ya."
@approxinfinity And then you will end up with 2 full hands of excellent fertilizer, ironically meaning you are hoarding the substance rather than toilet paper like everyone else!
Well, I for one believe, as always, that we should be able to hope we can trust in the credibilty of the leader of the free world.
@HighEliteMajor said in Do We Need N95 Masks For Everyone?:
The experts have made major errors and miscalculations.
Nonexperts have made more. The biggest difference is that (most) scientists provide the information on which they base their recommendations and conclusions. Nonexperts have nothing but wishful thinking on this topic.
@HighEliteMajor Okay for you to think that if you want to worry about it, but you are ignoring "in such a matter" which refers clearly to a final judgment or decision not under appeal.
If you are an attorney, I will reconsider but you have never answered that question previously. As it is, your analysis reflects what lots of lay people do when reading statutes, even experienced ones. If you are highly experienced in statutory interpretation, especially in permissible collateral uses of evidence or principles relating to res judicata, I will eagerly consider any authority you cite.
Here is an example: SC has a provision saying that no one can leave a car running unattended. A local article said someone got a ticket for leaving his car running in front of his house to heat it up in the winter.
I looked up the provision. It is in a section dealing with operation of vehicles on roadways. The definition of roadway expressly states on a public road or highway, not including private property. I called the reporter to tell him about the provision. He argued, as do you, that the cop whom he talked to had said because it is a separate sentence it granted an independent basis to allow ticketing in a driveway. I called the state law enforcement division. They couldn't stop laughing.
Context is everything.
@HighEliteMajor I think you are misinterpreting the final sentence, not intentionally, but because you are granting way too much leeway to a clause expressly drafted in highly limited terms.
Let's simplify the language. The first sentence in essence allows the NCAA to accept as true findings and facts established in a decision that is not under appeal. The second sentence says that evidence submitted "in such a matter" may be considered in the infractions process.
"In such a matter" is meaningless if it does not refer to a decision discussed in the first sentence. The phrase simply means that the infractions process can consider the evidence used to arrive at a decision not under appeal.
It is not an independent basis of using collateral evidence. (It really just means I was wrong in saying they are limited to a court's factual findings--they can look at the underlying evidence, too.)
A basic rule of statutory construction is to interpret subclauses within a clause in a way that effectuates the purpose of the clause. If the second sentence is not a corollary to the first, the clause would simply say the NCAA can use any evidence developed in any proceeding anywhere, even if it is still ongoing.
Another principle of statutory construction is to interpret clauses in a manner that makes sense. It would make no sense to say the NCAA can only accept a final decision's findings as true, but it can also accept any evidence submitted in a non-final judgment under appeal. A broad grant to look at all types of evidence in a case where it is subject to reversal (i.e., a disavowal on review of the very evidence underlying a flawed decision) contravenes the very purpose of the requirement that the collateral case findings are final.
The second sentence specifically refers to the first, and that therefore limits it.
@approxinfinity I find them pretty hard to breathe in, so I imagine it would be torture to have to breathe while in extreme exertion.
I can see opposing players grabbing masks. Will they interrupt games every time a mask comes off, as they stop for blood now? 4 hour football games, etc.
Maybe the answer will also address concussions: flag football (with latex gloves, of course).
I have several N95 masks and 3 N100 cartridge respirators from years past that I bought for dust (SC summers and huge bare spots in the lawn), concrete mixing, and insecticide spraying (the N100s are for gasses as well as dust.) All have been used a few times but are fine for us. I rotate the N95s each time I go out, which is only about twice a week.
When I bought them, I was mad because I couldn't find simple dusk masks and I hate bandanas. But I am glad to have them if I am going anywhere now because the idiots seem to think "reopening" means "no sense."
Last week:
@HighEliteMajor said in NOA response from KU discussion:
That senility is spreading.
No vaccine for debilitas senilitas. 🤕
(The best thing about taking Latin for 4 years was the help it provided in standardized tests like the LSAT. The second best thing was making up cool words.)
@HighEliteMajor Wow, sorry, maybe I should not read things and then respond later. I cannot figure out where I got waylaid.... Covid-isolation-induced senility, perhaps.
So just consider that post my own thoughts about whether we can sue. (I agree scorched earth is not a good approach. I do think we win on procedures, but the time and expense will be costly.)
@HighEliteMajor I was intrigued by your comment indicating the possibility of the NCAA using some testimony from the federal trial but disavowing other testimony that may undermine its case against KU.
The reason I am intrigued is that I think that if the NCAA does this,, they will indeed hand a federal lawsuit to KU on a silver platter. The NCAA may govern its owm members by its own rules and procedures. I have discussed for what seems like years how the courts will defer to private adjudicatory processes that are directed to voluntary members of an organization (which you also have discussed). So long as an organization follows its own rules (which must include notice, the right to be heard, and some type of appeal) courts keep their hands off. Churches, lodges, etc all administer their proceedings largely unfettered. It is also really what underlies the general legislative and common law deference to arbitrations.
There is one exception, however, that the NCAA could easily stumble into. First, a general observation: let's remember that the use by the NCAA of evidence from federal criminal trials has never been tested anywhere. In virtually all penalty types of proceedings, using testimony from a third party against the subject of the proceeding is usually allowed only when the subject of the proceeding had a chance to cross-examine or otherwise participate (whether they availed themselves of it or not). It is entirely likely in my mind that a court faced with the notion of use of outside testimony against a party that had no ability to participate in that proceeding would consider this as a case of first impression potentially impacting hundreds--thousands, including D2 and D3--of schools. The huge importance of ensuring that the NCAA's rules passed a fundamental test of private adudicatory due process would absolutely, in my mind, guarantee a willingness by a court to take the case.
But secondarily, this case itself would beg for review if the NCAA chose to use their rules by cherry picking which evidence from a court case to use. It is axiomatic that the NCAA developed the rule to get to things it otherwise would miss since it has no subpoena power. I think courts could easily say that there is nothing more arbitrary than excising disfavorable evidence while trumpeting the favorable. Courts, even if willing to let the NCAA use this novel power after considering that first challenge discussed above, might (I think "would") decide that the NCAA can only use evidence that is specifically and conclusively established as a finding in the prior case. Evidence that is extraneous to a guilty finding should not be used because it may well not have been the result of a judicial or jury finding.
Example: Agent is on trial for providing drugs to get Student A to sign a representation contract in high school. Student A testifies that he and Agent invited classmate Student B to dinner and did drugs later. Agent is found guilty. NCAA wants to impose initial eligibility sanction on Student B for accepting value (meal and drugs) from Agent, and tries to introduce Student A's testimony to prove it.
I think a court would say it violates fundamental fairness to allow the use of extraneous evidence like that. A judge or jury could have found Agent guilty while disbelieving that Student B was involved.
Anyway, if the NCAA tries to disregard the testimony that KU did not know of the payments, I think the door is wide open.
Jeez, poor Cleveland State just never can catch a break....
@Kcmatt7 Did most of your wedding providers give refunds? I know you were reluctant to cancel because there were a few nonrefundable deposits, but I suspect those got waived when large events were barred.
Good luck with everything. I hope she still wears her dress and that you get to see her coming down an aisle. My heart still flutters remembering that moment at our wedding almost 21 years ago. Memorize your moments--your attention will be on the bride anyway. A crowd is the furthest thing from your mind during the ceremony!
@approxinfinity No, Dylans said it.
After being told that the human race would be better off if those of us with defective genes died off, I will find it hard to get too upset.
Maybe they will claim he was fired for absenteeism.
Msybe Missouri will settle its lawsuit against China by having the game moved to Beijing. And KU could wait until MU takes off, then go home instead.
Chris Piper senior season, Model 2.0.
@approxinfinity It takes some stupid followers for anyone doing the reciting to be successful.
John Oliver covers these things almost weekly.
@justanotherfan But I thought all we have to do to get back to normal is to carry a sign demanding freedom from good sense, and then have Donald Trump issue a Captain Picard order: "Make it so."
Geez, you mean life involves crap like science and knowledge and stuff?
NO! I WANT MY MAGA RALLIES!!!
@bskeet Sorry we can't cash in!
@Crimsonorblue22 said in Differentiating fact from opinion on COVID-19:
@approxinfinity I'd like Stephen to bear a child!
Please do not encourage the passing on of any more idiocy genes!
@benshawks08 Don't think I am minimizing the damage being done to the country.
I certainly was not saying that Trump and his ilk are harmless or that what they do doesn't matter. He and his pals will make literally billions off of corrupt schemes, including the extraordinary damage the administration is doing to environmental and safety regulations.
What I AM saying is that the system is there to eventually contol those abuses. (It is up to opponents to make that work.) So far, the system has survived.