posted
Umm, calling me a "crackpot" is, pretty much by definition, not the best way to convince me of anything. Posts: 3354 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson: I think it's "several people, including me, have..." -- because the "including X" bit doesn't have anything to do with the rest of the sentence. Consider "several people, including President Nixon, have" or "several people, including you, have" or "several people, including multiple random aliens, have..." "Me," in this case, is the object of the act of inclusion.
In this case, isn't "including me" a present participle verbal phrase that uses a linking verb?
Posts: 14017 | Registered: May 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm posting on a cell phone while standing in line at Panera. I don't even know which e-mail addy is associated with this account. I'll check when I get home.
Posts: 13680 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by steven: I really doubt anyone would take this seriously. How could they?
I think most people err on the side of caution. Even if an accusation of pedophilia/molestation/sexual assault has been proved incorrect, people remember. Your name is subconsciously associated with the crime. I think it is fair to say that a lot of people will avoid you or use caution around you JUST IN CASE you really did perpetrate those crimes. It is safer to avoid someone accused of rape and acquitted in case they really a rapist, than to give them the benefit of the doubt. It isn't justified, but it is common enough that false accusations, whether in jest or malice, leave most people tarnished.
In the few cases of this that I've had experience with, the individuals and their families inevitably choose/are pressured to move somewhere else and get new jobs, etc.
I am also confused as to why someone *wouldn't* take the issue of NAMBLA or someone's alleged association with it seriously. NAMBLA is a real organization, with many members, that advocates and crusades to legalize the sexualization of children. That is a serious issue. And as another poster mentioned, there is a huge difference between Jon Stewart making a joke about them and accusing someone of being a member simply for kicks or because you don't like them.
Posts: 3936 | Registered: Jul 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson: I think it's "several people, including me, have..." -- because the "including X" bit doesn't have anything to do with the rest of the sentence. Consider "several people, including President Nixon, have" or "several people, including you, have" or "several people, including multiple random aliens, have..." "Me," in this case, is the object of the act of inclusion.
THAT is why me "sounded" right to me. Thanks, Tom.
Posts: 21182 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by steven: Is the guy a pedophile? Is he a danger to children? That's the issue. Do the students have grounds to think he is? Granted, observational bias is probably what is making me have these thoughts, but me and my buddies were totally, completely right about our teacher. Principals, parents, and other teachers appear to have been oblivious.
Dude, if you think a teacher is really a pedophile, you go to the police. Otherwise, non-public figures have legal protections against unsubstantiated accusations. A teacher being accused of pedophilia is possibly the worst thing you can do to them. It can and has ruined careers.
quote:Originally posted by Eaquae Legit: I am honestly baffled that there are people who don't see connecting a teacher with a pedophilia organisation as serious. I'd say "maybe it's a parent thing," except I don't have kids.
Not appreciated at all.
Why not? How is that different from:
quote:Originally posted by Threads: Maybe it's a generational thing?
Nevermind. I had read it as an indirect way of saying my parents raised me improperly. Now I understand what he meant.
Posts: 1327 | Registered: Aug 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by ClaudiaTherese: Edited to add: Whether or not some young folk would take it seriously isn't the point. What is more relevant is what unwarranted repercussions the teacher would face from this, and such repercussions would primarily occur in the minds and actions of other adults, particularly those of standing in the community (that is just the way power works).
It might also be instructive to understand why this accusation would be interpreted differently by students then by adults. However, I don't have a good way of finding a general answer to that.
Posts: 1327 | Registered: Aug 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by ClaudiaTherese: Edited to add: Whether or not some young folk would take it seriously isn't the point. What is more relevant is what unwarranted repercussions the teacher would face from this, and such repercussions would primarily occur in the minds and actions of other adults, particularly those of standing in the community (that is just the way power works).
It might also be instructive to understand why this accusation would be interpreted differently by students then by adults. However, I don't have a good way of finding a general answer to that.
But both students and adults have access to the accusation/fraud. And the teacher will have to deal with the consequences from both groups. The students may have seen it as a joke, but their jokes has graver consequences in the adult sphere. Therefore those consequences should weigh into the disciplinary action just as much.
Posts: 3936 | Registered: Jul 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't think crackpot was a personal slight; it was pretty much a generic term for anybody who opines on an internet forum. But I retract it and apologize for offending you.
Posts: 13680 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:I don't I would take the actions of these students very seriously, given the situation. You're going to have to convince me that the students thought that anyone would take this seriously.
steven, don't you see that YOU are evidence of the real damage that this teacher faces? YOU have suggested that he may likely be a pedophile, based on your experience in sixth grade and no knowledge of this guy other than the hoax. You've never met this guy, and you think there may be something wrong with him. YOU have suggested investigating the teacher's behavior and judging his heart before punishing the students, implying that the circumstances may be mitigated by his failings. WHY should HE be investigated? He is the victim here! Do you favor investigating victims of other crimes as well, to ascertain to what extent they were "asking for it"?
That's exactly what I was thinking. Well put, Icarus.
You know, Steven, it occurs to me that if your career as a professional Internet troll doesn't pan out, you'd make an excellent member of the Saudi Arabian judicial system.
Posts: 2804 | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by ClaudiaTherese: Edited to add: Whether or not some young folk would take it seriously isn't the point. What is more relevant is what unwarranted repercussions the teacher would face from this, and such repercussions would primarily occur in the minds and actions of other adults, particularly those of standing in the community (that is just the way power works).
It might also be instructive to understand why this accusation would be interpreted differently by students then by adults. However, I don't have a good way of finding a general answer to that.
But both students and adults have access to the accusation/fraud. And the teacher will have to deal with the consequences from both groups. The students may have seen it as a joke, but their jokes has graver consequences in the adult sphere. Therefore those consequences should weigh into the disciplinary action just as much.
I meant why do students interpret it differently than adults (assuming that is the case)?
Posts: 1327 | Registered: Aug 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm coming back to say that I don't agree with steven at all in this thread. I think I've shown a great deal of naivety, based on the fact that most of the older folks are appalled at my initial reaction, so I'll try to explain.
I think the disconnect for me--was that I see a huge difference in 1. going to the principal and accusing a teacher of molesting children and 2. writing "I am a member of NAMBLA. Signed, Mr Johnson" on the bathroom wall.
I DO understand the severity of the first claim--how the accusation alone can end the teacher's career. If that's what these kids had done, by all means, 90 days or more. But how how serious is the second? It seems to me the type of thing that would get 2-weeks suspension, erased, and ignored.
Do you see what I'm getting at? I don't consider the facebook page to be an ACCUSATION of anything. It's a joke page that got taken down quickly, and if everyone didn't make a big deal out of it, nobody would care. The fact that they made such a huge stink with punishing them makes it a much bigger deal for Mr. Johnson, who now has Stevens asking whether he's fit to teach.
quote:Originally posted by rivka: Lack of experience with real-life consequences of their actions?
That doesn't answer why adults take it seriously. Though he wasn't responding to you, I think Launchywiggin made a relevant point:
quote:Originally posted by Launchywiggin: Do you see what I'm getting at? I don't consider the facebook page to be an ACCUSATION of anything. It's a joke page that got taken down quickly, and if everyone didn't make a big deal out of it, nobody would care. The fact that they made such a huge stink with punishing them makes it a much bigger deal for Mr. Johnson, who now has Stevens asking whether he's fit to teach.
All I've managed to get so far is that it's serious because it could negatively impact the teacher's career and that it could negatively impact the teacher's career because everyone takes it seriously.
quote:Originally posted by ketchupqueen: A bathroom wall and the internet are not equivalent, to me.
We're talking about Facebook though. Who in their right mind would admit to being a member of NAMBLA on their Facebook? That inconsistency alone would have clued me in that it was a joke.
quote:We're talking about Facebook though. Who in their right mind would admit to being a member of NAMBLA on their Facebook? That inconsistency alone would have clued me in that it was a joke.
Not all adults and/or members of the community are that internet savvy. And for that matter, they wouldn't even have to see the page. Word gets around about accusations like that, and the word that it was a joke would not necessarily get passed accordingly.
Posts: 21182 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by ketchupqueen: Word gets around about accusations like that, and the word that it was a joke would not necessarily get passed accordingly.
quote:Originally posted by rivka: Lack of experience with real-life consequences of their actions?
That is definitely a huge part of it. My friends and I used to say that if you were going to kick someone's Trash, you'd better go ahead and do it before your 18th Bday.
The younger you are, the smaller your world tends to be.
Posts: 3936 | Registered: Jul 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Word gets around about accusations like that
I absolutely agree that if the teacher were accused of anything, it would be a problem.
I just see a big difference between an accusation of pedophilia and what they did.
I also agree that the bathroom wall and the internet aren't equivalent, but it's an important comparison to make.
Posts: 1314 | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Launchywiggin: I'm coming back to say that I don't agree with steven at all in this thread, where CT clumped me with him on the last page.
But I didn't:
quote:Originally posted by ClaudiaTherese: I'm well aware that Threads and Launchywiggan disagree with this, but so it goes.
quote: I meant why do students interpret it differently than adults (assuming that is the case)?
I'm a big believer that the biggest difference between kids and adults is the number of steps down the chain of cause and effect they look. These kids probably looked a couple steps down the line, decided they weren't likely to get caught, and were done considering it.
A savvy teen might have considered carefully who to invite since someone running their mouthes six months from now could still get them in trouble. An adult would consider how this effects their fifteen year plan and wouldn't bother for lack of stock options.
The other issue is that adults are much more likely to have seen this happen once or twice. I'd seen a guy get away with molesting his kids by high school, but I'm pretty sure I was the exception. As we've all noticed with steven's reaction, you're a little more sensitive to an issue when you've seen it actually happen.
Then there are all the emotional issues that go with adults who have responsibilities towards children and realize how amazingly ineffective they really are. No matter how hard we try, we really can't stop bad things from happening to kids. If this guy really molested someone, then we've failed the child. If he didn't and we go too hard on him, then we've failed each other. It's really a no-win situation.
Posts: 2283 | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Let's say, for the sake of argument, that the people minimizing this 'joke' are correct and it's really not a big deal, and people shouldn't have taken it seriously or been upset.
Even if that's objectively true somehow, that doesn't change the fact that people do take it seriously and it is upsetting to most, and that a few kids should change to suit the conventions concerning pedophilia claims rather than expecting protection when the rest of the world doesn't bend to their 'joke'.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Launchywiggin: I'm coming back to say that I don't agree with steven at all in this thread, where CT clumped me with him on the last page.
But I didn't:
quote:Originally posted by ClaudiaTherese: I'm well aware that Threads and Launchywiggan disagree with this, but so it goes.
eek! I'm sorry! Edited!
And I'll say again that it doesn't seem like a claim to me, not in the dangerous sense. I DO think pedophilia claims should be taken seriously.
Posts: 1314 | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:it doesn't seem like a claim to me, not in the dangerous sense.
The problem is drawing that line. Maybe, just for our hypothesis, let's say that this was NOT a "dangerous" claim against the teacher. Well, what if the next such claim was more widely seen, and did more damage? And the students who did that one insisted that that was a joke, too?
The law doesn't really distinguish between the two. If it's untrue, has the potential to be damaging if it's believed, and is published, not marked as parody, then it's libel. Period. (At least, that is my understanding.) The line is drawn there because that way there aren't any shades of gray about what is or isn't.
Posts: 21182 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by steven: I don't I would take the actions of these students very seriously, given the situation. You're going to have to convince me that the students thought that anyone would take this seriously.
steven, that is not necessary to establish culpability. Intent may make a difference in what charges can and should be laid, and what punishment should thus follow, but ignorance of outcome doesn't mean (in our society) that you are absolved of responsibility for the outcomes of your actions.
Moreover, intent is often measured only with respect to the action, not the results. That is, it's clear the students intended to post information they knew to be false. Especially in a civil context, this makes them culpable for the results for which that disclosure is the proximate cause. Whether they knew that result would occur is often immaterial (although knowledge would make punitive damages more likely).
Note that this is true in many criminal charges. For example, stealing an old watch is grand larceny in most states, even if the thief thought it was worth $1. The intent is to steal. By engaging in that act, the thief "owns" all the consequences.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
Edited!
