• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

jagec: you're right.

For his good deed, the bond owner?s son gave Moore $100

The guy returns $20k and the actual owner's son only gives him $100, how ungrateful.

He gets $4k + a job lead from other people though.
 
So the owner didn't give him anything, and the owner's son only gave him $100?

that is crap.

(unless i misread it)
 
Originally posted by: purbeast0
So the owner didn't give him anything, and the owner's son only gave him $100?

that is crap.

(unless i misread it)

Doesnt say how old the son was I dont think. If the son was 10 yr old for instance, 100$ is a fortune.

Edit: i suck at the reading.
 
Originally posted by: purbeast0
So the owner didn't give him anything, and the owner's son only gave him $100?

that is crap.

(unless i misread it)

The owner was dead (IIRC from the original article). The family had thrown out some of his clothes, and the homeless guy happened upon the bonds which were accidentally discarded.
 
Originally posted by: Tiamat
Originally posted by: purbeast0
So the owner didn't give him anything, and the owner's son only gave him $100?

that is crap.

(unless i misread it)

Doesnt say how old the son was I dont think. If the son was 10 yr old for instance, 100$ is a fortune.

Edit: the father is 60, so i guess the son could be anywhere between teenage to 30ish.

and the father should be the one who's giving instead of the son right?


edit: ah. the old man is dead... okay.
 
Originally posted by: andylawcc
Originally posted by: Tiamat
Originally posted by: purbeast0
So the owner didn't give him anything, and the owner's son only gave him $100?

that is crap.

(unless i misread it)

Doesnt say how old the son was I dont think. If the son was 10 yr old for instance, 100$ is a fortune.

Edit: the father is 60, so i guess the son could be anywhere between teenage to 30ish.

and the father should be the one who's giving instead of the son right?

I misread, the 59 year old is the homeless man. The father is probably dead, and the son is of unknown age - probably mature.
 
Originally posted by: MrChad
Originally posted by: purbeast0
So the owner didn't give him anything, and the owner's son only gave him $100?

that is crap.

(unless i misread it)

The owner was dead (IIRC from the original article). The family had thrown out some of his clothes, and the homeless guy happened upon the bonds which were accidentally discarded.

wow ... pretty pathetic on the sons part.
 
Originally posted by: DingDingDao
Wow. Maybe there is hope for mankind after all. :thumbsup:


Yeah for the bum, the owner of the bonds is a fvcking cheap skate. An honest person just saved the guy $21,000 and he ponies up $100 reward.
I know we don't do things for rewards, but he should be gratefull he got any of it back and share the wealth with someone that is down on his luck.
 
I bet you guys would be like the Smith in the article right?

?We would have given him the whole amount, period,? Smith said. ?No questions asked.?

😀

[edit]
BTW, because of that $100 reward, he received over $4k for his kindness. Or as some chuches goers said, "The Lord works in mysterious ways".
[/edit]
 
Yeah, I wouldn't give him the full $21k, but he'd get a good portion of it. At least enough to clean up and get a job, like others did for him.
 
The people who owned the bonds look like fvcks right now because they didn't give him anything. The people in the town rallied and gave the man cash.

 
Back
Top