Mariners front office accused of racism

[wrathofhahn]

On 11/14/2018 at 8:32 PM, Jerksticks said:

What does that refer to?  False reports of anything in general?

I remember in high school, the making shit up about people to hurt them seemed to be much higher, like around 90% of malicious stories heard.  

Glad to see it goes down to a respectable 4-8% once we turn 18! ?

How many false allegations and twisting of peoples words do you reckon happens to adults? *ahem*

6 hours ago, Jake said:

The trust you put in her statements shifts quite a bit if she was fired after making these complaints through internal channels. It wouldn't be rational to make these claims after you're fired in general, but sometimes people get pissed off when they're fired. But if she was fired because she tried to do this privately, it only makes sense she'd try to put them on blast now.

Or there could be financial considerations the more she speaks and the more damage she does to the Mariners organization the more incentive they have to pay her to shut up and go away.

I hope with the MLB getting involved they find out the truth and like I said earlier if Dipitio said what she claims he should be fired and never work in the MLB again but if he didn't or her very specific allegations are untrue (trainers and players careers targeted) then she should be sued for defamation even if she mixed some half-truths with lies.

On 11/14/2018 at 10:51 PM, raBBit said:

That’s not a political opinion that’s a possible outcome of this situation. If this prompts more women to come forward with similar stories the MLB will have to respond to it all. They’re not the NFL, they will hire a PR firm and they will handle it up front. Probably some job initiative involved. 

I don't think it's as widespread as the media would like you to believe. When it does happen it makes sense to respond to it not only because the MLB has to but they should. There is no place for what Dipito is accused of. The key word is accused.

I don't think the solution is hire a bunch of people because they check certain boxes it may work from a PR standpoint but it will only build upon certain suspicions. I've had coworkers that I knew got the job through nepotism, initiatives, etc rarely did they work out and almost never did anyone in the group respect their work.

 

 

 

 

[southsider2k5]

9 hours ago, wrathofhahn said:

How many false allegations and twisting of peoples words do you reckon happens to adults? *ahem*

Or there could be financial considerations the more she speaks and the more damage she does to the Mariners organization the more incentive they have to pay her to shut up and go away.

I hope with the MLB getting involved they find out the truth and like I said earlier if Dipitio said what she claims he should be fired and never work in the MLB again but if he didn't or her very specific allegations are untrue (trainers and players careers targeted) then she should be sued for defamation even if she mixed some half-truths with lies.

I don't think it's as widespread as the media would like you to believe. When it does happen it makes sense to respond to it not only because the MLB has to but they should. There is no place for what Dipito is accused of. The key word is accused.

I don't think the solution is hire a bunch of people because they check certain boxes it may work from a PR standpoint but it will only build upon certain suspicions. I've had coworkers that I knew got the job through nepotism, initiatives, etc rarely did they work out and almost never did anyone in the group respect their work.

 

 

 

 

Because the Mariners have zero financial incentive to paint her as a liar and protect themselves from discrimination lawsuits?

[wrathofhahn]

6 hours ago, southsider2k5 said:

Because the Mariners have zero financial incentive to paint her as a liar and protect themselves from discrimination lawsuits?

They do and Martin knows that which is what my post was referencing and to be clear it isn't just potential discrimination lawsuits but their brand itself. Which presents an excellent opportunity to try and extract some revenge and enrich yourself in the process.

I don't know whose lying and whose telling the truth I know these allegations have never been levied against Dipoto despite being in the league since the late 80's first as a player then as a GM. I know noone else to this point has corroborated any of her claims publicly and I find it hard to believe he was some sort of secret racist that only appeared when he spoke to Martin.

I find the whole thing far fetched and hard to believe but we will have to see what the MLB finds.

 

[oldsox]

Who was the trainer that was fired?  Anybody know?  When, what for, etc?

[chitownsportsfan]

The default position on anything Mariners related should be: they fucked it up.  

[CaliSoxFanViaSWside]

There are many reasons people of all races get fired. Check out the reasons and if any of these employees thought that some of the reasons were because of discrimination or EEO related then they should act on it including her. If she thinks making it public will help that's her prerogative,

[Jake]

58 minutes ago, CaliSoxFanViaSWside said:

There are many reasons people of all races get fired. Check out the reasons and if any of these employees thought that some of the reasons were because of discrimination or EEO related then they should act on it including her. If she thinks making it public will help that's her prerogative,

To be clear, as far as I can tell she's not saying she was the victim of discrimination, she's just saying she witnessed a racist workplace and seems to be implying that she was fired for complaining about it

[oldsox]

Long article in The Athletic today.  Letter from CEO.  I fell asleep reading it.

[ChiSox1917]

On 11/14/2018 at 6:51 PM, southsider2k5 said:

Statistically it isn't even close. Something between 10 to 20 true reports for every potential false one.

Pretty sure you just pulled this out of your ass.  

Not sure what stats are publicly available on this, but in terms of the federal government, only about 30% of EEO allegations are found to have merit.  I would assume that it is likely pretty close to the same in the private sector.  

[raBBit]

23 minutes ago, ChiSox1917 said:

Pretty sure you just pulled this out of your ass.  

Not sure what stats are publicly available on this, but in terms of the federal government, only about 30% of EEO allegations are found to have merit.  I would assume that it is likely pretty close to the same in the private sector.  

He referenced me to google when I asked him where he was getting those numbers from.

[southsider2k5]

1 hour ago, ChiSox1917 said:

Pretty sure you just pulled this out of your ass.  

Not sure what stats are publicly available on this, but in terms of the federal government, only about 30% of EEO allegations are found to have merit.  I would assume that it is likely pretty close to the same in the private sector.  

Again, statistically between 4 and 8% of reports are found to be false.  "Found to have merit" isn't the opposite of not true/false/ or lies.  There was a million stories on this when the Kavanaugh stuff was going on, and despite the repeated attempts to turn this into another filibuster style closed thread with accompanying snide comments, or maybe even a mass deletion of posts, all I will say is that the information is out there if it is really wanted.  This topic was well covered very recently in the media.

[ChiSox1917]

1 hour ago, southsider2k5 said:

Again, statistically between 4 and 8% of reports are found to be false.  "Found to have merit" isn't the opposite of not true/false/ or lies.  There was a million stories on this when the Kavanaugh stuff was going on, and despite the repeated attempts to turn this into another filibuster style closed thread with accompanying snide comments, or maybe even a mass deletion of posts, all I will say is that the information is out there if it is really wanted.  This topic was well covered very recently in the media.

Being true would require a greater burden of proof than just having merit.  

Your numbers are very specific.  If you can state such specific numbers, you'd surely have a source.  Otherwise you're just BSing.  Saying that "a million stories came out when the Kavanaugh stuff was going on" is not helping your claim.  Especially since even in the specific case against Kavanaugh, several of the accusers were unequivocally proven to be flat out lying.  

[southsider2k5]

40 minutes ago, ChiSox1917 said:

Being true would require a greater burden of proof than just having merit.  

Your numbers are very specific.  If you can state such specific numbers, you'd surely have a source.  Otherwise you're just BSing.  Saying that "a million stories came out when the Kavanaugh stuff was going on" is not helping your claim.  Especially since even in the specific case against Kavanaugh, several of the accusers were unequivocally proven to be flat out lying.  

This is honestly a hilarious response for its blatant hypocrisy. 

[oldsox]

Chisox 1917 was neither hilarious nor hypocritical.

[NorthSideSox72]

10 hours ago, ChiSox1917 said:

Being true would require a greater burden of proof than just having merit.  

Your numbers are very specific.  If you can state such specific numbers, you'd surely have a source.  Otherwise you're just BSing.  Saying that "a million stories came out when the Kavanaugh stuff was going on" is not helping your claim.  Especially since even in the specific case against Kavanaugh, several of the accusers were unequivocally proven to be flat out lying.  

Bolded is outright false. No such thing happened.

But I think it's an important point here on what a false or made up story is, versus not enough to prosecute. They are different things. Statistics on, for example, sexual assaults, need to be seen for their context. Lots of reports on that sort of thing to police are not prosecuted, not because they are false reports, but for various other reasons (not enough evidence for a chance at prosecution, uncooperative witnesses or even victms, etc.). That doesn't make those false reports. I am not sure what study SS2K5 was referring to, but the number of actual false reports in that area (sexual assaults) is single digits in any legitimate study I've seen reported. It is just really hard to ever come to a solid number though because different PD's will have different word salads used to characterize what they consider, say, "unfounded".

Back to the main topic here, no one knows how much of what this person reported is true or not, All we know is she is risking her entire medical career to say it, so at the very least, we shouldn't be dismissing it out of hand.

 

[ptatc]

On 11/17/2018 at 1:00 PM, CaliSoxFanViaSWside said:

There are many reasons people of all races get fired. Check out the reasons and if any of these employees thought that some of the reasons were because of discrimination or EEO related then they should act on it including her. If she thinks making it public will help that's her prerogative,

What? Are you crazy,? Examine the facts before you make generalized assumptions on either side of the accusations?

What fun would this board be if people on either side didn't fire off opinions with no investigations. You sir, are thinking far too clearly.

[raBBit]

1 hour ago, NorthSideSox72 said:

Bolded is outright false. No such thing happened.

Two different women (at least) were fabricating their stories about Kavanaugh. 

Judy Munro-Leigthton was referred to the FBI for her fabrications of getting raped in a car by Kavanaugh. She has since retracted.

https://www.nationalreview.com/news/kavanaugh-accuser-admits-she-fabricated-allegations/

Julie Swetnick said that Kavanugh partook in gang raping and that was normal at Yale. She hasn't admitted she lied but none of her classmates corroborate her story and plenty deny it. Dershowitz recommended criminal charges 

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/26/us/politics/julie-swetnick-avenatti-kavenaugh.html?module=inline

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/alan-dershowitz-if-julie-swetnick-lied-she-should-be-tried-for-perjury-and-sent-to-prison

Edited November 20, 2018 by raBBit

[NorthSideSox72]

21 minutes ago, raBBit said:

Two different women (at least) were fabricating their stories about Kavanaugh. 

Judy Munro-Leigthton was referred to the FBI for her fabrications of getting raped in a car by Kavanaugh. She has since retracted.

https://www.nationalreview.com/news/kavanaugh-accuser-admits-she-fabricated-allegations/

Julie Swetnick said that Kavanugh partook in gang raping and that was normal at Yale. She hasn't admitted she lied but none of her classmates corroborate her story and plenty deny it. Dershowitz recommended criminal charges 

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/26/us/politics/julie-swetnick-avenatti-kavenaugh.html?module=inline

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/alan-dershowitz-if-julie-swetnick-lied-she-should-be-tried-for-perjury-and-sent-to-prison

Swetnick's report is not false. This is exactly what I am getting at that people are missing or just ignoring. There is a difference between a made up or false story, and a story that has yet to be corroborated and may not be provable in court or a hearing. So that example only proves my point.

The other one, the crazy lady from Kentucky, didn't even send the letter. She just jumped at the chance out of anger to try to hit Kavanaugh. Now this is a true example of an actual false report, so I stand corrected in this case. Also worth noting this one seemed pretty obvious in hindsight. But the other three women that accused Kavanaugh? None are "false" stories, as far as anyone can prove or tell. Which in the end is showing exactly what is important here - that most accusations are not false.

 

[southsider2k5]

46 minutes ago, NorthSideSox72 said:

Swetnick's report is not false. This is exactly what I am getting at that people are missing or just ignoring. There is a difference between a made up or false story, and a story that has yet to be corroborated and may not be provable in court or a hearing. So that example only proves my point.

The other one, the crazy lady from Kentucky, didn't even send the letter. She just jumped at the chance out of anger to try to hit Kavanaugh. Now this is a true example of an actual false report, so I stand corrected in this case. Also worth noting this one seemed pretty obvious in hindsight. But the other three women that accused Kavanaugh? None are "false" stories, as far as anyone can prove or tell. Which in the end is showing exactly what is important here - that most accusations are not false.

 

And again, we spent more time on the one report that is false to slur the narrative, instead of the ones  the focus on the ones that are true.   Statistically this is about as clear of a case of confirmation bias as you could ever want to see.

[raBBit]

1 hour ago, NorthSideSox72 said:

Swetnick's report is not false. This is exactly what I am getting at that people are missing or just ignoring. There is a difference between a made up or false story, and a story that has yet to be corroborated and may not be provable in court or a hearing. So that example only proves my point.

The other one, the crazy lady from Kentucky, didn't even send the letter. She just jumped at the chance out of anger to try to hit Kavanaugh. Now this is a true example of an actual false report, so I stand corrected in this case. Also worth noting this one seemed pretty obvious in hindsight. But the other three women that accused Kavanaugh? None are "false" stories, as far as anyone can prove or tell. Which in the end is showing exactly what is important here - that most accusations are not false.

Swetnick's initial sworn statement was that Kavanuagh was involved with spiking the punch. She later walked back her comments saying he was near the punch bowl. It's the changing of her sworn statement that has led a Harvard law professor to suggest she be tried for perjury. 

[NorthSideSox72]

Just now, raBBit said:

Swetnick's initial sworn statement was that Kavanuagh was involved with spiking the punch. She later walked back her comments saying he was near the punch bowl. It's the changing of her sworn statement that has led a Harvard law professor to suggest she be tried for perjury. 

If that was perjury, then Kavanagh perjured himself multiple times.

Again though, let's not get too derailed. On the case at hand, this idea that the world is full of women looking to throw around false accusations is laughable on it's face. The frequency of false reports for these sorts of accusations is some level of very low, which is the only logical conclusion anyway because of what is at stake for the accusers. So let's not assume that this particular woman is likely to be lying, when the history of such actions AND the history of the team's front office both indicate it's likely the other way around.

 

[Balta1701]

2 minutes ago, raBBit said:

Swetnick's initial sworn statement was that Kavanuagh was involved with spiking the punch. She later walked back her comments saying he was near the punch bowl. It's the changing of her sworn statement that has led a Harvard law professor to suggest she be tried for perjury. 

1. Retired Harvard Law Professor, no longer active.

2. Who also had sworn statements filed against him claiming that he had sex with underage girls who were being sold as sex slaves (case settled out of court).

[raBBit]

1 hour ago, southsider2k5 said:

And again, we spent more time on the one report that is false to slur the narrative, instead of the ones  the focus on the ones that are true.   Statistically this is about as clear of a case of confirmation bias as you could ever want to see.

The italicized isn't a characterization of this thread in any away. 

As far as the bolded, it's just wrong. This isn't even a matter of statistics but for some reason you keep circling back to stats. You'll just make some snide comment and plow through anyone disagreeing with your baseless claims, so it's not worth going through, but in short, this is not nearly as cut and dried as you are presenting it to be.

[raBBit]

3 minutes ago, NorthSideSox72 said:

If that was perjury, then Kavanagh perjured himself multiple times.

Again though, let's not get too derailed. On the case at hand, this idea that the world is full of women looking to throw around false accusations is laughable on it's face. The frequency of false reports for these sorts of accusations is some level of very low, which is the only logical conclusion anyway because of what is at stake for the accusers. So let's not assume that this particular woman is likely to be lying, when the history of such actions AND the history of the team's front office both indicate it's likely the other way around.

Yeah I was more speaking to the case where evidence is readily available as opposed to this former M's employee situation where we just have her social media posts. 

[southsider2k5]

1 minute ago, raBBit said:

The italicized isn't a characterization of this thread in any away. 

As far as the bolded, it's just wrong. This isn't even a matter of statistics but for some reason you keep circling back to stats. You'll just make some snide comment and plow through anyone disagreeing with your baseless claims, so it's not worth going through, but in short, this is not nearly as cut and dried as you are presenting it to be.

Those are in reply to YOUR snide comments seemingly characterizing women in general who complain as being out for personal gain more likely than actual victims, while simultaneously clinging to the completely disproven belief that this is a much more regular occurrence than any statistic known has ever shown.  I will also note while you refer to them as "baseless comments" you 100% can't disprove them as every single scientific study proves me right, which is why you keep pushing the burden over so that when I do prove you wrong again, you can just change the narrative again.  But as usual you keep circling back to these fallacies in an attempt to get this topic closed, like you do so many others where you are seemingly politically threatened.