I can't stand a weasel

[Fargo]

Latin, I'm alittle rusty and it's been awhile Mr J.D.
But here goes,
Ad Quaestionem Facti Non Respondent Judices, Ad Quaestionem Juris Non Respondent Juratores.

There was a former member on here who likes to claim to be done with a discussion, but never actually was. "Good day sir!" Or "I'm out" actually meant the exact opposite. Multiple people used the account, including his lawyer girlfriend, and he always referred to me as J.D....

Wierd sense of deja vu here.

 

[Expat]

There was a former member on here who likes to claim to be done with a discussion, but never actually was. "Good day sir!" Or "I'm out" actually meant the exact opposite. Multiple people used the account, including his lawyer girlfriend, and he always referred to me as J.D....

Wierd sense of deja vu here.

You must really love your Jack Daniels to have that as a well known moniker.

 

[Fargo]

You must really love your Jack Daniels to have that as a well known moniker.

Mmmmmmm, whiskey!

 

[Clay Pigeon]

There was a former member on here who likes to claim to be done with a discussion, but never actually was. "Good day sir!" Or "I'm out" actually meant the exact opposite. Multiple people used the accoun

Wierd sense of deja vu here.

I have posted here before that we are friends, Good Friends.
Long term Good Friends, What of it?

We are having dinner tonight, anything I can tell him for you?

And he would laugh at the fact you think when he referred to you as J.D. it had nothing to do with you having a Juris Doctorate.

 

[Bill of Rights]

This entire thread is annoying. You jumped ship - and thought the company you were leaving owes you something. Joke.

No. He made a professional move to better himself, gave appropriate notice, and asked a favor he would have been fine with their denying. That's not the issue at all. The issue is that the person who he asked told him, yes, we can do what you asked, and then went back on his word.

An example would be if you, as a member of INGO, dropped me a PM and asked me if a given post you wanted to make would be within the rules to do, or if there was a way you could change it so that it would be. This happens from time to time here. If I told you that yes, this post was OK, you made it, and I then came back and infracted and banned you for it, it would make me a liar and untrustworthy.

I have not and will not do that. If I tell you a post is OK, I will defend the fact that you did ask and got permission to post whatever it was. Now, if I made a mistake and missed a watermark in an image or something like that, that's on me. The post will still be removed, but there will be no infraction and there will be no ban, provided what you posted is what you asked me to pre-approve.

The former supervisor behaved in an untrustworthy manner. He lied, when he could have been up-front and said, "Dude, you're leaving the company and think we should let you forward calls to your new number? No, we can't do that." and that would have been honest, and the OP would have been OK with that.

I'd like to know which company and which person this is, so that I'd know not to have dealings with them/him, however, I won't ask the OP to reveal that, as to do so would cross some ethical lines, and I believe from his posts that he is not a man who would tell anyway. It would also be too akin to "doxxing", and I won't support that practice or precedent.

What the OP was owed is what you, he, I, indeed, everyone is owed: Honesty. It is sad that he did not receive it.
It is more sad that anyone would believe that he was not owed that basic human decency, especially if the only reason anyone can give is just that he wanted to better himself, and did so in the societally acceptable manner: gave notice, helped with the transition, etc.


Blessings,
Bill

 

[Woobie]

I have posted here before that we are friends, Good Friends.
Long term Good Friends, What of it?

We are having dinner tonight, anything I can tell him for you?

And he would laugh at the fact you think when he referred to you as J.D. it had nothing to do with you having a Juris Doctorate.

This charade is getting a little worn out.

 

[Woobie]

I feel for you, CZB. It sucks when someone lies to you. Some INGO members feel the need to change the subject for an opportunity to criticize. I hope the weasel gets out-weaseled someday and it burns him badly. You have the solace of knowing you behaved honorably.

When I was in recruiting we were not allowed to give out our personal number, and personal phones were never to be used for business. That was policy. In reality, the crackberry phones on Sprint service sucked, and we got yelled at if we didn't answer our phones. So we all used our personal phones anyway. Then some guys used their government phones for personal business, which resulted in some interesting voicemails and drunk dials coming your way when phones were switched.

 

[BGDave]

This charade is getting a little worn out.

I'm gonna go out on a limb here. Either HLNL or 17S the Hoffmiester. Either way he is "familiar".

 

[JettaKnight]

No. He made a professional move to better himself, gave appropriate notice, and asked a favor he would have been fine with their denying. That's not the issue at all. The issue is that the person who he asked told him, yes, we can do what you asked, and then went back on his word.

Here's a guy that gets it.

And quitting a job is not betrayal; it's business.

 

[churchmouse]

Here's a guy that gets it.

And quitting a job is not betrayal; it's business.

Bingo.

 

[Bill of Rights]

Y'know, it's a funny thing. Three people in this thread commented about noticing the similarity. We discussed it in the mod forum as well, and oddly enough several mods had noted the posting style, word choices, and other things along the way.

I'll say again here that when we ban someone, we don't ban the screen name, but rather we ban the person sitting at the keys. There have been some members in the past who have chosen to try to come back after changing their attitudes. Some have been successful and have become welcome members of the community in their new name. The key is that they change what they've done in the past and stopped doing what it was that got them banned. Trolling has never been allowed here, and that has not changed. Likewise, when you know a member has been disallowed entry here, allowing that person to use your login has in the past earned a ban for the person who allowed it.

Clay Pigeon, you're not fooling anyone with the "oh, he's a good friend!" as I would be unsurprised to learn that you and the referenced former member have had dinner together every night of your life, and probably sat in the same chair with each other as well. Adding to that the thinly-veiled insult of another INGO member or even the appearance of doing so was enough in our minds to ban your account.

I was going to make this a permaban today; we take the whole "account sharing", at least with people who have been told they are unwelcome here, fairly seriously, just as we do banned members coming back with new names. But then I thought that if I do that, all you're going to do is get resentful. Instead, I'm making this a long temp-ban that I hope I won't have to make permanent.

Last, you chose the name you did, and I'm guessing did so with full intention of it being "shot down". I'd hate to disappoint you in that, so...

"PULL!"

See you next year.

Blessings,
Bill

I have posted here before that we are friends, Good Friends.
Long term Good Friends, What of it?

We are having dinner tonight, anything I can tell him for you?

And he would laugh at the fact you think when he referred to you as J.D. it had nothing to do with you having a Juris Doctorate.

 

[churchmouse]

I love Bills post...........love-em.

 

[Bill of Rights]

I love Bills post...........love-em.

I've said many times, I don't like banning people. That has not changed.

That does not in any way mean I won't do it, just that I don't like it.

Blessings,
Bill

 

[hopper68]

Y'know, it's a funny thing. Three people in this thread commented about noticing the similarity. We discussed it in the mod forum as well, and oddly enough several mods had noted the posting style, word choices, and other things along the way.

I'll say again here that when we ban someone, we don't ban the screen name, but rather we ban the person sitting at the keys. There have been some members in the past who have chosen to try to come back after changing their attitudes. Some have been successful and have become welcome members of the community in their new name. The key is that they change what they've done in the past and stopped doing what it was that got them banned. Trolling has never been allowed here, and that has not changed. Likewise, when you know a member has been disallowed entry here, allowing that person to use your login has in the past earned a ban for the person who allowed it.

Clay Pigeon, you're not fooling anyone with the "oh, he's a good friend!" as I would be unsurprised to learn that you and the referenced former member have had dinner together every night of your life, and probably sat in the same chair with each other as well. Adding to that the thinly-veiled insult of another INGO member or even the appearance of doing so was enough in our minds to ban your account.

I was going to make this a permaban today; we take the whole "account sharing", at least with people who have been told they are unwelcome here, fairly seriously, just as we do banned members coming back with new names. But then I thought that if I do that, all you're going to do is get resentful. Instead, I'm making this a long temp-ban that I hope I won't have to make permanent.

Last, you chose the name you did, and I'm guessing did so with full intention of it being "shot down". I'd hate to disappoint you in that, so...

"PULL!"

See you next year.

Blessings,
Bill

I'm out.

See, he does understand!

 

[Woobie]

Dusted him, Bill. Nice shooting.

 

[Jimb]

Weasels don't like squirrels with recording devices

 

[Jimb]

Situation sucks for sure, but could have been avoided by keeping your personal number, PERSONAL. Two phones isn't a problem with most people that have company phones, except maybe, Hillary Clinton, but even that was a lie!

Lies lies lies....2 months down and more lies emanating from Washington than ever.....maybe alternative truths.

 

[Vigilant]

I have posted here before that we are friends, Good Friends.
Long term Good Friends, What of it?

Harrison Ford, "Clear and Present Danger"...oh, we're not playing name that quote?

 

[Bill of Rights]

Harrison Ford, "Clear and Present Danger"...oh, we're not playing name that quote?

He may answer you next year, about this time. Or he may not, dunno.