Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lane3 who wrote (100412)	2/14/2005 4:53:58 PM
From: Nadine Carroll	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793670

Nadine, sorry, I disagree. It is hardly a far stretch for the listener to be suspicious that he might have in mind a deliberate policy. "Concluding that he is speaking of a deliberate policy" requires more evidence than that. When one speaks of an organization which is known for disciple and adherence to regulation, repeatedly committing a certain act, without any qualifying assertions as to the lack of discipline or 'rogue elements', it is reasonable (& I use reasonable as in "reasonable man" in law) to conclude that the behavior of the organization, its operational policy, is being referred to. If I said "I know of many instances where the US Army prevented Special Forces troops from retiring at the previously arranged time," would you merely "suspect" that I was talking about the current operational policy of the Army instead of aberrant behavior by rogue commanders? I think not. You would conclude that it was policy unless you heard some new information that asserted it was not policy.

To: Lane3 who wrote (100412)	2/14/2005 9:02:03 PM
From: TimF	Respond to of 793670

Nadine, sorry, I disagree. It is hardly a far stretch for the listener to be suspicious that he might have in mind a deliberate policy. "Concluding that he is speaking of a deliberate policy" requires more evidence than that. What about "Concluding that many people might think he means a deliberate policy and that some of them will be convinced that there really is such a deliberate policy, and that it is quite possible that he meant for some people to think there is a deliberate policy whether or not he actually believes that such a policy exists". Ideally you put someone who makes a statement like this on the spot. Get them to explictly address whether or not they are making an accusation of such a deliberate policy. Then they they either back down from at best careless statements, or are put on the record making a specific accusation. Of course many of the people who make such statements are good at avoiding being put on the spot in this way. Tim