PROBATION DISCUSSIONS 21 21

[RockMyAmadeus]

[Awax]

Does it matter

 

The dude is a bad seed. Now, later, next year.. He was going to get there at some point.

[Beige]

Does it matter

 

The dude is a bad seed. Now, later, next year.. He was going to get there at some point.

 

Yes, it does - because next time, it might not be someone so obviously suited to the HOS as Hustruck.

 

Jimmy and I rarely agree on anything, but this time - it's a very good question.

 

Anyhow - I'll leave it here - if anyone wants to chime in with any suggestions on how to answer this question , I'd be delighted to read them.

[IchigosSoul]

This is for Jaybuck/Sharon/Pov or whoever has an interest......

 

Did anyone answer Jimmy L's question about double jeopardy?

 

This isn't an attempt to derail the Hustruck poll again - but I wish someone would actually look at this question and think about it.

 

Hustruck Boy is currently on the probation list for this offence. Now, we want to retry him again for the HOS.

Why did he not

a) get a HOS poll in the first place or

b) get the PL vote stopped and changed prior to him going on the list?

 

Does this mean that in retrospect people can be pulled from the PL and then put up for a HOS vote?

What is the cut-off date?

30 days after PL? 90 days?

 

I am voting yes for HT for HOS - that's just for open disclosure so people don't think I have some sort of man-crush on the conqueror of cancer - but Jimmy raised a very pertinent question....

 

If you have been 'tried' for a 'board-crime' and gone on the PL, what are the triggering factors to suddenly make it a HOS offence?

 

I think this is worth discussion.....

 

 

There isn't a vote for PL. You don't complete a transaction, wronged person shows proof, you get nominated, and 3 days later you go on the list till you make it right.

 

He turned it up to HoS level with his stream of lies, in my opinion. Other than when he admitted he never had the book, everything he told 4comics and the boards was pure BS.

 

Of course, you are correct - there is no poll for the PL.

And yes, everything he said was BS.

I'm not denying these proven facts or defending HusBoy.

 

No-one though is answering the actual question.

 

Where is the cut-off between a PL offence being upgraded to a HOS offense when new 'info' comes to light?

 

Again, if Hustruck had been put on the PL (which he was) and things had gone on its merry way with no further problems - 3 months later the cracked slab pic had been exposed - would their be all this clamour to go to HOS?

 

I'm just asking a question, which no-one wants to address or answer.

 

Actually its Jimmy L's question........

 

The line is when he started lying. If he had not followed through on the deal, then stayed away or silent, he would be on the PL until he made right with 4comix. When he started giving stories that he couldn't keep straight, using stolen pictures, and the info given by the original seller, that's when he crossed over to the HoS. If he's willing to do things like that, he stays into GIJOEISAWESOME territory in that he is lying to gain money(or in his case, keep from losing any).

 

Look at it this way, he went to the PL for not completing a transaction, and he's probably going to go on the HoS for lying to everyone after the facts came to light.

[slym2none]

There is no such thing as pl/hos double jeopardy. He was added to the pl in accordance with the rules. Subsequent to his inclusion more evidence came out which showed the seriousness of his offenses including the fact that he lied and continues to lie to get out of a transaction.

 

Hence my reason for wanting to spend time getting all the evidence.

 

Ashley Judd disagrees.

 

So does Tommy Lee Jones.

 

And who ever the guy on the boat was.

 

If this was a courtroom..... which it isn't, though I could understand the confusion. If you want to look at it that way, then think of it like this. You could be found not guilty of a crime in the State Courts, but the Federal Courts could still find a way to charge you with something else based on the same crime. DJ doesn't apply.

 

To connect it more strongly with JL - state marijuana laws can vary, but can still be enforced on the federal level in the US.

 

 

 

 

-slym

[slym2none]

This is for Jaybuck/Sharon/Pov or whoever has an interest......

 

Did anyone answer Jimmy L's question about double jeopardy?

 

This isn't an attempt to derail the Hustruck poll again - but I wish someone would actually look at this question and think about it.

 

Hustruck Boy is currently on the probation list for this offence. Now, we want to retry him again for the HOS.

Why did he not

a) get a HOS poll in the first place or

b) get the PL vote stopped and changed prior to him going on the list?

 

Does this mean that in retrospect people can be pulled from the PL and then put up for a HOS vote?

What is the cut-off date?

30 days after PL? 90 days?

 

I am voting yes for HT for HOS - that's just for open disclosure so people don't think I have some sort of man-crush on the conqueror of cancer - but Jimmy raised a very pertinent question....

 

If you have been 'tried' for a 'board-crime' and gone on the PL, what are the triggering factors to suddenly make it a HOS offence?

 

I think this is worth discussion.....

 

 

There isn't a vote for PL. You don't complete a transaction, wronged person shows proof, you get nominated, and 3 days later you go on the list till you make it right.

 

He turned it up to HoS level with his stream of lies, in my opinion. Other than when he admitted he never had the book, everything he told 4comics and the boards was pure BS.

 

Of course, you are correct - there is no poll for the PL.

And yes, everything he said was BS.

I'm not denying these proven facts or defending HusBoy.

 

No-one though is answering the actual question.

 

Where is the cut-off between a PL offence being upgraded to a HOS offense when new 'info' comes to light?

 

Again, if Hustruck had been put on the PL (which he was) and things had gone on its merry way with no further problems - 3 months later the cracked slab pic had been exposed - would their be all this clamour to go to HOS?

 

I'm just asking a question, which no-one wants to address or answer.

 

Actually its Jimmy L's question........

 

When it comes to protecting this board/community, IMHO - there should be no cutoff.

 

 

 

-slym

[Speedy-D]

This is for Jaybuck/Sharon/Pov or whoever has an interest......

 

Did anyone answer Jimmy L's question about double jeopardy?

 

This isn't an attempt to derail the Hustruck poll again - but I wish someone would actually look at this question and think about it.

 

Hustruck Boy is currently on the probation list for this offence. Now, we want to retry him again for the HOS.

Why did he not

a) get a HOS poll in the first place or

b) get the PL vote stopped and changed prior to him going on the list?

 

Does this mean that in retrospect people can be pulled from the PL and then put up for a HOS vote?

What is the cut-off date?

30 days after PL? 90 days?

 

I am voting yes for HT for HOS - that's just for open disclosure so people don't think I have some sort of man-crush on the conqueror of cancer - but Jimmy raised a very pertinent question....

 

If you have been 'tried' for a 'board-crime' and gone on the PL, what are the triggering factors to suddenly make it a HOS offence?

 

I think this is worth discussion.....

 

 

There isn't a vote for PL. You don't complete a transaction, wronged person shows proof, you get nominated, and 3 days later you go on the list till you make it right.

 

He turned it up to HoS level with his stream of lies, in my opinion. Other than when he admitted he never had the book, everything he told 4comics and the boards was pure BS.

 

Of course, you are correct - there is no poll for the PL.

And yes, everything he said was BS.

I'm not denying these proven facts or defending HusBoy.

 

No-one though is answering the actual question.

 

Where is the cut-off between a PL offence being upgraded to a HOS offense when new 'info' comes to light?

 

Again, if Hustruck had been put on the PL (which he was) and things had gone on its merry way with no further problems - 3 months later the cracked slab pic had been exposed - would their be all this clamour to go to HOS?

 

I'm just asking a question, which no-one wants to address or answer.

 

Actually its Jimmy L's question........

Who says there's any statute of limitations? If someone wants to nominate a Boardie for the HOS they can do so whenever they want. If they prove their case and have the votes then they succeed.

 

As for "double jeopardy," I don't see it. The PL and HOS are different beasts with different processes and different goals.

[chrisco37]

I voted YES.

 

 

[wombat]

The "cutoff" seems to be someone starting a HOS poll. Seems pretty straight forward.

[EC ed]

No-one though is answering the actual question.

 

Where is the cut-off between a PL offence being upgraded to a HOS offense when new 'info' comes to light?

 

I'm just asking a question, which no-one wants to address or answer.

 

Actually its Jimmy L's question........

 

Let me take a stab, based on the way I see it (or at least the way it "should" be). Looking at a PL offense as being "upgraded" to the HOS is not the way to look at it.

 

A PL addition stems from an individual boardie taking issue with an individual transaction. When that boardie is satisfied, the boardie removes the offender from the PL, period. If that offense was so egregious, or if the offender has shown a pattern of repeat offenses, that the community (not the individual) feels the need to step in with an HOS nomination, that is a separate decision.

 

At that point, the two actions are functionally independent...the two things are not linked together. For example, then, it is possible that a boardie can be put on the PL by an individual, then voted to the HOS by the community, then removed from the PL by the individual, but remain on the HOS. Or, a boardie can be voted onto the HOS without being put on the PL first. That is, suppose the individual didn't want to put a boardie on the PL, but behavior was egregious...the community can still pursue an HOS action. The two things are distinct, and pursued by different parties...an individual vs. the community.

 

There is no "upgrading"...if someone is on the PL, putting them on the HOS does/should not remove them from the PL..the HOS is never a mere "upgrade" that takes you off the PL...the individual has to explicitly remove them from the PL via satisfaction of their initial individual offense. That is, a boardie can be on the PL (from the individual) and on the HOS (from the community) at the same time.

 

edit: What I'm saying is that there are two separate questions (that should necessarily be discussed in conjunction with one another):

 

1) What offense should qualify for a "valid" PL nomination by an individual?

2) What offense should qualify for an "HOS" poll by the community?

 

Hopefully we'll continue to get input over in jaybuck43's CG thread...

Edited January 13, 2015 by edowens71

[MetalPSI]

This is too much like politics. I voted twice and both those votes are no good?

 

I know on isn't for sure, but there is a third poll now?

[DR.X]

Where is the cut-off between a PL offence being upgraded to a HOS offense when new 'info' comes to light?

 

I try and stay out of these marathon debates when they pop up from time to time on these boards. They give me a head-ache with all of the theories, speculations, and what if's.

 

I have discussed this at length through P.M.s with people, and this a good point that Biege brings up.

 

Where do you draw the line here. Where?

 

Is there any difference between a liar on a $10.00 book, or a $20,000.00 book, because

we have had both.

 

Where do you draw the line on one lie, or a non stop compounding of one lie after another.

I don't speak for anyone but me on here. Once you lie to me, I'm done with you, and not just on these message boards. I don't really care if your in the HOS or on the PL list, you're still a f - cking liar.

[HarveySwick]

This is too much like politics. I voted twice and both those votes are no good?

 

I know on isn't for sure, but there is a third poll now?

Calm down.

 

There was the initial poll I deleted. I started a new poll with the requested evidence last night at 10:45 PM with a start time for voting at 11:00 PM. But there was concern that if you voted before 11PM, your vote wasn't counted and you may be prevented from voting again. All I did was restart the same poll shortly after 11PM so everyone's vote would count.

 

I'm terribly sorry for any inconvenience. (thumbs u

[EC ed]

Where do you draw the line on one lie, or a non stop compounding of one lie after another. I don't speak for anyone but me on here. Once you lie to me, I'm done with you, and not just on these message boards. I don't really care if your in the HOS or on the PL list, you're still a f - cking liar.

 

DR.X, we pretty much agree here - I detest a liar...and I don't need a board-supplied list to keep track of someone who has lied to me (or has lied to others, when I can see it). (thumbs u

 

Having said that, the question for the group in the bigger context (since we're trying to also discuss what rules should exist) is should "lying" in any form be grounds for HOS nomination?

 

edit: I mean, we could hard code it right in there:

 

b) The Hall Of Shame is for serious transgressions. For example, selling a book/books and sending nothing of value in the package. Interfering with someone's business. Being a multiple offender. Lying.

Edited January 13, 2015 by edowens71

[Jeffro.]

Where do you draw the line on one lie, or a non stop compounding of one lie after another. I don't speak for anyone but me on here. Once you lie to me, I'm done with you, and not just on these message boards. I don't really care if your in the HOS or on the PL list, you're still a f - cking liar.

 

DR.X, we pretty much agree here - I detest a liar...and I don't need a board-supplied list to keep track of someone who has lied to me. (thumbs u

 

Having said that, the question for the group in the bigger context (since we're trying to also discuss what rules should exist) is should "lying" in any form be grounds for HOS nomination?

 

edit: I mean, we could hard code it right in there:

 

b) The Hall Of Shame is for serious transgressions. For example, selling a book/books and sending nothing of value in the package. Interfering with someone's business. Being a multiple offender. Lying.

 

Non-transaction based lying will earn someone a HOS nomination? Is that what you're saying here?

[EC ed]

Where do you draw the line on one lie, or a non stop compounding of one lie after another. I don't speak for anyone but me on here. Once you lie to me, I'm done with you, and not just on these message boards. I don't really care if your in the HOS or on the PL list, you're still a f - cking liar.

 

DR.X, we pretty much agree here - I detest a liar...and I don't need a board-supplied list to keep track of someone who has lied to me. (thumbs u

 

Having said that, the question for the group in the bigger context (since we're trying to also discuss what rules should exist) is should "lying" in any form be grounds for HOS nomination?

 

edit: I mean, we could hard code it right in there:

 

b) The Hall Of Shame is for serious transgressions. For example, selling a book/books and sending nothing of value in the package. Interfering with someone's business. Being a multiple offender. Lying.

 

Non-transaction based lying will earn someone a HOS nomination? Is that what you're saying here?

 

I'm not saying anything. I'm asking, an an effort to try to keep the discussion moving along. We're trying to discuss the rules for these two lists. Should we make "lying" part of it? If so, should we limit it to "lying in the course of a transaction", or should we expand it to "lying to a boardie about anything?"

 

Personally, I think things either on the PL or HOS should be limited to transactions, so my answer would be "lying in the course of a transaction" (thumbs u

Edited January 13, 2015 by edowens71

[skypinkblu]

This is for Jaybuck/Sharon/Pov or whoever has an interest......

 

Did anyone answer Jimmy L's question about double jeopardy?

 

This isn't an attempt to derail the Hustruck poll again - but I wish someone would actually look at this question and think about it.

 

Hustruck Boy is currently on the probation list for this offence. Now, we want to retry him again for the HOS.

Why did he not

a) get a HOS poll in the first place or

b) get the PL vote stopped and changed prior to him going on the list?

 

Does this mean that in retrospect people can be pulled from the PL and then put up for a HOS vote?

What is the cut-off date?

30 days after PL? 90 days?

 

I am voting yes for HT for HOS - that's just for open disclosure so people don't think I have some sort of man-crush on the conqueror of cancer - but Jimmy raised a very pertinent question....

 

If you have been 'tried' for a 'board-crime' and gone on the PL, what are the triggering factors to suddenly make it a HOS offence?

 

I think this is worth discussion.....

 

 

When we were a smaller group and this HOS thing started,it was pretty much standard for there to be 3 strikes, unless there was something so egregious that a compilation of events made people think "OMG that's horrible", or something to that effect.

 

Just one transaction was usually not enough, but there were examples with AlleyBat and Vermont Comics and TFL and Filter that changed things. One was an out and out theft and the other involved a huge amount of money.

 

When these issues arose, someone would think things were so horrible, they would bring it to a vote. Now mind you that didn't mean everyone would vote yes and there was at least one incident where someone popular was voted in (after 3 strikes) where at least one of his friends was upset years later.

 

Once again, it's pretty obvious the rules need to be updated. Personally I don't think they need to reach the level of courtroom accepted procedure, but they should be logical.

I'm a fan of as few rules as possible, but when we make them, they should be simple and clear so the majority can easily understand them.

I'm sure that's what Jason is aiming for in his thread.

 

 

 

I agree it's too late for the Hustruck/CGCboy poll to be held until the new rules can be hammered out. If Hustruck or whatever his new name next week is unhappy or feels he has done something to fix the problem, he can call for a new vote and see if anyone is willing to listen. I don't think we ever set a limit on appeals...but perhaps that's something that should be addressed.

 

 

[jsilverjanet]

This is too much like politics. I voted twice and both those votes are no good?

 

I know on isn't for sure, but there is a third poll now?

Calm down.

 

There was the initial poll I deleted. I started a new poll with the requested evidence last night at 10:45 PM with a start time for voting at 11:00 PM. But there was concern that if you voted before 11PM, your vote wasn't counted and you may be prevented from voting again. All I did was restart the same poll shortly after 11PM so everyone's vote would count.

 

I'm terribly sorry for any inconvenience. (thumbs u

I'm sure there will be another "comedian" who will come along and ask about the poll being deleted, the second poll and now a third

 

People complain about lawyers on the board, I really think the issue is everyone wants to be a comedian, but they aren't very funny or original

[Jeffro.]

Where do you draw the line on one lie, or a non stop compounding of one lie after another. I don't speak for anyone but me on here. Once you lie to me, I'm done with you, and not just on these message boards. I don't really care if your in the HOS or on the PL list, you're still a f - cking liar.

 

DR.X, we pretty much agree here - I detest a liar...and I don't need a board-supplied list to keep track of someone who has lied to me. (thumbs u

 

Having said that, the question for the group in the bigger context (since we're trying to also discuss what rules should exist) is should "lying" in any form be grounds for HOS nomination?

 

edit: I mean, we could hard code it right in there:

 

b) The Hall Of Shame is for serious transgressions. For example, selling a book/books and sending nothing of value in the package. Interfering with someone's business. Being a multiple offender. Lying.

 

Non-transaction based lying will earn someone a HOS nomination? Is that what you're saying here?

 

I'm not saying anything. I'm asking, an an effort to try to keep the discussion moving along. We're trying to discuss the rules for these two lists. Should we make "lying" part of it? If so, should we limit it to "lying in the course of a transaction", or should we expand it to "lying to a boardie about anything?"

 

Personally, I think things either on the PL or HOS should be limited to transactions, so my answer would be "lying in the course of a transaction" (thumbs u

 

I agree with you. Lying in the course of a transaction? Absolutely.

I'm just not sure at all why you even brought up non-transactional lying. If you include that stuff, the HOS list will be so big it will need it's own zip code.

[DR.X]

And again, where is the line drawn. There are several things at play here. There is a big difference between someone who did not a mail a book on time, forgot to mail it, or life got in the way.

 

And there is also a difference between some newb that comes in here selling right off the bat, and people start buying right off the bat. And one month later they are all crying that no one got the books, and the jerk wad has dissapeared with everyone's loot.

 

Then you have the flat out fricking liar, period.They just keep compounding one lie on top of another lie, and it just keeps going. You want to trust someone like that down the road. Not me, no way in hell. Get them out of here and quick.

 

You have to have some sort of balance here between good and bad. Character, reputation, and ethics are the foundation of these boards. One won't exist without the other.