Not been back here for a while but for the record I am a B
Damn right, not only should Paterno have been fired and his reputation tarnished for ever, thankfully this was done, anyone who do not do more to protect these children deserves the same.
It so simple and I really can’t believe this has to be typed out again but if you hear of a grown man naked with a kid in a shower at your workplace you damn well make sure that kid is safe. No passing it up the chain for someone else to deal with, no doing the minimum required, you make sure no matter what you have to do. Anything less makes you morally culpable for the crime.
Being that the mods have closed many a thread that was shorter and less stupid than this one, I can only assume they have a wager going about how long we’ll keep beating this dead horse if they don’t intervene. By now, someone’s lost badly and the rest of of them are probably in head-shaking disbelief.
Or maybe it’s just fascinating to keep getting updates on SA’s latest meal and senior outdoor activities.
100th page is only valid for certain page views, of course, so it is an irrelevant metric to most on this board. 5,000th post and 5,000th response are, of course, Bryan Ekers claim to WINNING!
Paterno was never charged, so there’s no reason to defend him. The university is defending Curley and Schultz because if they are ultimately convicted, it puts the university in a bad position in the inevitable rash of civil suits. It’s like that recent Pit thread in which Progressive defended the person who killed a Progressive driver, because had they won, it would have been cheaper than paying out the driver’s underinsured motorist policy. It’s morally reprehensible, but financially responsible.
That train has left the station. With Penn State accepting the Freah report they have accepted responsibility. They will be paying the victim’s a ton of money and they know it. I doubt there will be a civil trial. There will be an out of court settlement.
I hacked my view to show 47.5 posts per page, so I was at the top of page 100 a week ago: Winning… for very small values of “Win”*.
*Which is how I feel about the hundreds of hours I’ve put in on this thread since the beginning (good thing I’m not capable of finding a cure for cancer, and the only reason I haven’t gotten around to it was refuting SA… Wait! What if… paper towel tubes are the cure? And we found it here, because never before have so many people violated so many tubes, or lined up so many boys…)
Starving, here’s your post from January, where you first came up with the paper towel tube test.
Notice that you say the word “squat” twice.
Now here’s your post from yesterday:
Yeah, I’m going to stop right here because, well, look, if you don’t know it’s really no use bothering to explain.
So anyway, Starving, I have a question. Why is it, to this very day, you uphold the value of the Paper Towel Tube test as a way of stating that it was physically impossible for Sandusky to have been raping victim #2, when you’re simultaneously claiming that Sandusky was “standing (not squatting, crouching, legs not bent, etc.)” which would make the Paper Towel Tube test completely inappropriate as a means to test the liklihood of rape?
Vote E you’re a goat felcher who is so desperate to claim that you are better than SA that you actually stopped sucking goat cocks to do something other than sucking goat cock.
If I’ve learned anything from this thread it’s that if everyone is telling you you’re wrong it is absolute proof that you’re right and they know it and they’re all just jealous of you. Because of SCIENCE.