Penn State protects child rapist that was former famous D-Coordinator

[RPD]

If you want to dispute the scientists, you go right ahead. See if you can get them into a flat earth argument, while you're at it.

Oh so you are deflecting again. So if you order a drink "on the rocks" do you say, I'll take that "on solid water"?

 

[shortylickens]

 

[preslove]

sixone, I apologize for being abusive earlier. Your relentless trolling hasn't only brought out my sadistic streak, however, it has also brought a demonic troll named Stuxinator.

I've worked in and out of academia for about 12 years, and one thing I've learned during that time is that the management of a university affects how it observes the norms (a more vague term for rules or guidelines) that have been learned over the years. Good management is knowing how to make decisions that take into account all the different conflicting norms and stakeholders. Often times, you have corrupt management that infects a college or an entire university, which causes all kinds of stupid decisions to be made.

There are many norms that you can't really fudge on, though. You can't be flexible on the accounting, you can't allow plagiarism, you have to adhere to the law, etc. This last one is pretty fucking key.

The NCAA is an organization made up of member universities. The laws broken in this case are perjury and the mandatory reporting of abuse. Most states have laws on the books requiring educators and university administrators to report abuse, so most of the full time employees of Penn State are required by law to report abuse. Therefore, "Penn State University" is mandated by statute to turn over abusers to the police.

"Penn State," the actual university, was run by perjurers and child rapist enablers, and their corruption let a (we now know) long rumored heinous crime go on being committed for at least a decade. Because the administration of the Penn State was corrupted into breaking the law, many new victims were initiated into Sandusky's wicked little horrorshow.

This corruption pervaded the top tier of university administration, saying that the "university" did nothing wrong is to deny the basic fact that the president of the university is it's chief executive and therefore responsible for the conduct of the university. If the president of a university and his top administrators conspire to commit a crime, you can pretty easily say that their university is committing a crime. The faculty and staff run the university, so they actually are "the university." The president, his VPs and the deans of the various colleges are ultimately responsible for the behavior of the university. Their behavior when they are on the job is the university's behavior.

Therefore, because the president and other administrators of Penn State conspired to conceal Sandusky's crimes, I can truthfully say that "Penn State University" conspired to conceal those horrific crimes.


As the NCAA and Big 10 are made up of universities that also have to follow these same norms and laws, it's kind of hard for them to keep Penn State in their clubs without some kind of sanction.

If Penn State were actually a classy organization, and not despicably corrupted, they'd voluntarily suspend their season. But, they're not going to do it, so someone needs to do it. Someone has to, and the NCAA can't keep a reputation as a credible organization of universities and still allow PSU to remain unpunished.



sixone, you are defending evil. This is why you attracted an demonic troll to this thread and why I heaped abuse upon you.

Just leave the thread, it will improve your life.

 

[IndyColtsFan]

There's nothing in that article about regulating coaching contracts in any aspect other than pay. Trying to extrapolate that into being unable to regulate other aspects of the contracts seems disingenuous.

The NCAA has no authority to do what you propose. Period. It likely would not stand up to legal challenges. That link was but one I found quickly, as I had to leave.

This keeps going back to the question you dodged earlier.

 

[Fern]

Penn State football can use this as motivation, it's really an us against the world mentality for them. Don't be surprised if they are contending for the national championship
-snip-

Really?

Well, I for one would be really, really surprised.

Fern

 

[RPD]

The problem with your logic (not in this case, but as well as the NCAA issue as well) is you can't even grasp the most simplest of concepts.

I'll ask you to educate yourself on the phase states of water (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filehase-diag2.svg), but since we aren't chemists working in a lab, when someone says water they mean liquid. Because if you didn't, simply saying steam is hot water isn't completely true (I'll let you figure out why on the chart).

That's why in every day discussions, when someone says water, they mean water. They don't mean steam or ice or all of the above.

The conversation at hand was regarding water in the most common state humans experience it in. Maybe you aren't human?

I'm not disputing science (chemistry to be exact), I'm disputing your ability to disern the difference between water, ice and steam. The way you are trying to spin the words, they are one and all the same.

Unless you can show me proof (or hell just openly admit) that you exculsively order some SOLID WATER, water (i.e. known to everyone else as ICE water) I'll drop the point.

Otherwise you'd need to correct all your previous posts calling water, "water water", ice "solid water" and steam "gas water".

 

[Atomic Playboy]

I hear what you're saying preslove, but I've also worked in educational institutions, and I don't think that the actions of the people at the top can be spread out amongst everyone employed by the institution. When I was in college it came out that the President of the school, unbeknownst to the board of trustees, had lost $10 million of the school's endowment money through bad investments that hadn't been sanctioned by anyone. That wasn't the fault of the faculty, but they were the ones who got stung by it when they faced budget issues the next year. Is that fair? Should those faculty members feel culpable just because they agreed to work for an institution that made the decision to hire a President who made the decision to invest in a side project that turned out to be a failure? Even after he resigned in disgrace, you're left with professors and students who had no hand in the issue left to face the problems of the budget shortfalls it caused.

Is it fair to hold the faculty and students of PSU accountable for the actions of a few administrators and coaches?

 

[RPD]

I hear what you're saying preslove, but I've also worked in educational institutions, and I don't think that the actions of the people at the top can be spread out amongst everyone employed by the institution. When I was in college it came out that the President of the school, unbeknownst to the board of trustees, had lost $10 million of the school's endowment money through bad investments that hadn't been sanctioned by anyone. That wasn't the fault of the faculty, but they were the ones who got stung by it when they faced budget issues the next year. Is that fair? Should those faculty members feel culpable just because they agreed to work for an institution that made the decision to hire a President who made the decision to invest in a side project that turned out to be a failure? Even after he resigned in disgrace, you're left with professors and students who had no hand in the issue left to face the problems of the budget shortfalls it caused.

Is it fair to hold the faculty and students of PSU accountable for the actions of a few administrators and coaches?

Yes, as a soceity we have to hold institutions accountable. If they see oh, they tried to cover it up and if successful they wouldn't have had to deal with all the aftermath. We should do that if something like this comes up in our college as well.

Sometimes, what's right, ISN'T fair for EVERYONE involved. Damn near nothing is fair when you try to consider every possible angle. It's meaningless to try and make it such as it's an exersice in futility.

Even in your own example of the bad financing pres, is it fair they have to deal with the aftermath? Well no not really as they didn't directly make those bad investments, but it doesn't matter. They HAVE to deal with the budget short fall.

Is it fair for a family when their dead beat dad goes to jail and they can no longer pay to live at their current residence? No, but justice must set the presidence. There has to be repercussions for such actions.

 

[Atomic Playboy]

There has to be repercussions for such actions.

I worry when justice is motivated solely by punitive purposes, especially when those punitive actions don't actually punish a single person who was responsible for the actions in the first place. We have a strong need to see people punished for their wrongdoings, especially when we're talking about truly heinous crimes (which this obviously was). But when you stop thinking about Penn State as "The Institution" and start thinking about it as a collection of individuals, it becomes clear that punitive measures against Penn State at this point wouldn't actually affect a single one of the people who really need to be punished. The people who allowed these atrocities to happen are gone, and are being punished in courts or law and public opinion. How is handing out additional punitive measures against "The Institution" helpful in this case? It doesn't get at the evil fuckers who did these things. It's just a gnashed teeth "THERE MUST BE VENGEANCE" knee-jerk reaction that treats PSU as a single entity moving in lock-step with a child rapist. It's not, and no good comes from thinking of it as such.

 

[RPD]

I worry when justice is motivated solely by punitive purposes, especially when those punitive actions don't actually punish a single person who was responsible for the actions in the first place. We have a strong need to see people punished for their wrongdoings, especially when we're talking about truly heinous crimes (which this obviously was). But when you stop thinking about Penn State as "The Institution" and start thinking about it as a collection of individuals, it becomes clear that punitive measures against Penn State at this point wouldn't actually affect a single one of the people who really need to be punished. The people who allowed these atrocities to happen are gone, and are being punished in courts or law and public opinion. How is handing out additional punitive measures against "The Institution" helpful in this case? It doesn't get at the evil fuckers who did these things. It's just a gnashed teeth "THERE MUST BE VENGEANCE" knee-jerk reaction that treats PSU as a single entity moving in lock-step with a child rapist. It's not, and no good comes from thinking of it as such.

Such is life. But with your logic, if a loved one commits a crime and was also the primary bread winner in the family, is it fair for that family to no longer be able to provide themselves because this one person is now serving time?

 

[Atomic Playboy]

Such is life. But with your logic, if a loved one commits a crime and was also the primary bread winner in the family, is it fair for that family to no longer be able to provide themselves because this one person is now serving time?

That's completely different; it's one person being punished for their actions, which is exactly what I'm in favor of. We're talking about an orgnization being held accountable for the actions of people who are no longer part of the organization. What if a CEO uses his company to commit fraud, but leaves before an SEC investigation uncovers the fraud? That's a legitimate question, I honestly don't know if the company is charged, the CEO is charged, or both. But it seems, at the very least, you'd hope that the CEO who was responsible was hit with charges since he was the one that orchestrated things. Similarly, I'm more interested in seeing Sandusky/Paterno/Spanier/Curley/Schultz/McQueary hit with individual charges than seeing a whole organization punished for the actions of a few evil/cowardly people.

-EDIT- Obviously Sandusky and Paterno have already had their charges/death come about. But the other guys are still facing potential legal issues.

 

[RPD]

Its damn near the same. You have one group (Penn state or the family) which, in your eyes had nothing to do with something (which given the Penn state issue, I completely disagree and their hands are red as an entire college) but are paying the consequences for someone else's actions.

What you are arguing for isn't possible and just opens the flood gates for future instances to not do the right thing because, hey if they get away with it then well all the less hassle.

The college set the conduct and the enviroment that allowed this to happen, they will now pay for that, and rightfully so.

 

[Atomic Playboy]

What you are arguing for isn't possible and just opens the flood gates for future instances to not do the right thing because, hey if they get away with it then well all the less hassle.

The college set the conduct and the enviroment that allowed this to happen, they will now pay for that, and rightfully so.

Do you honestly think that NCAA penalties will make a shred of difference to whether something this awful happens in the future? Do you think that Paterno et al were thinking "Jeez, I hope the NCAA doesn't come down on us" when they were considering what to do in regards to finding out their longtime colleague and friend was likely a pedophile and rapist? Do you think that an NCAA sanction is a bigger concern to people than Federal prison? This sort of thing goes way beyond any punishments the NCAA can dole out, and if it happens in the future, whether or not Penn State gets hit with penalties now doesn't mean a thing to how it would play out at another institution.

 

[RPD]

Do you honestly think that NCAA penalties will make a shred of difference to whether something this awful happens in the future? Do you think that Paterno et al were thinking "Jeez, I hope the NCAA doesn't come down on us" when they were considering what to do in regards to finding out their longtime colleague and friend was likely a pedophile and rapist? Do you think that an NCAA sanction is a bigger concern to people than Federal prison? This sort of thing goes way beyond any punishments the NCAA can dole out, and if it happens in the future, whether or not Penn State gets hit with penalties now doesn't mean a thing to how it would play out at another institution.

Yes I do honestly believe what the NCAA does will make a difference in future instances. Do you want to be that president that sank the entire university by risking NOT doing the right thing, or try to look the other way in the hopes nothing ever comes of it. Well if you look at the past and see well the ones that looked the other way, history wasn't so cruel to OR holy shit they erased him and his family. Which choice is more likely going to be made knowing this? Don't fool yourself.

 

[Atomic Playboy]

I think that people realize that secrets are becoming nigh on impossible in the age of instantaneous information that we live in. Even without NCAA sanctions, a college President can look at whats happened at Penn State, with the Federal charges, and say "That won't happen on my watch." The President who looks at that situation and thinks "if there's NCAA charges, then I guess I wouldn't do it," is just an evil person, a corrupt opportunist who is obviously pulling the wrong message out of the proceedings.

Regardless, I'd be surprised if there weren't some stiff penalties handed down against Penn State. That's the nature of the NCAA. But I hope it's also treated as an opportunity to install more safeguards in athletics programs across the country so that abuses like this can't get swept under the rug for decades. This isn't just about punishing wrongdoing, it's about creating an environment where it is difficult or impossible for it to happen again, and hopefully that mindset extends beyond Penn State to every college in the country.

 

[shortylickens]

I see they got tired and left the forums.

 

[sixone]

sixone, I apologize for being abusive earlier. Your relentless trolling hasn't only brought out my sadistic streak, however, it has also brought a demonic troll named Stuxinator.

I've worked in and out of academia for about 12 years, and one thing I've learned during that time is that the management of a university affects how it observes the norms (a more vague term for rules or guidelines) that have been learned over the years. Good management is knowing how to make decisions that take into account all the different conflicting norms and stakeholders. Often times, you have corrupt management that infects a college or an entire university, which causes all kinds of stupid decisions to be made.

There are many norms that you can't really fudge on, though. You can't be flexible on the accounting, you can't allow plagiarism, you have to adhere to the law, etc. This last one is pretty fucking key.

The NCAA is an organization made up of member universities. The laws broken in this case are perjury and the mandatory reporting of abuse. Most states have laws on the books requiring educators and university administrators to report abuse, so most of the full time employees of Penn State are required by law to report abuse. Therefore, "Penn State University" is mandated by statute to turn over abusers to the police.

"Penn State," the actual university, was run by perjurers and child rapist enablers, and their corruption let a (we now know) long rumored heinous crime go on being committed for at least a decade. Because the administration of the Penn State was corrupted into breaking the law, many new victims were initiated into Sandusky's wicked little horrorshow.

This corruption pervaded the top tier of university administration, saying that the "university" did nothing wrong is to deny the basic fact that the president of the university is it's chief executive and therefore responsible for the conduct of the university. If the president of a university and his top administrators conspire to commit a crime, you can pretty easily say that their university is committing a crime. The faculty and staff run the university, so they actually are "the university." The president, his VPs and the deans of the various colleges are ultimately responsible for the behavior of the university. Their behavior when they are on the job is the university's behavior.

Therefore, because the president and other administrators of Penn State conspired to conceal Sandusky's crimes, I can truthfully say that "Penn State University" conspired to conceal those horrific crimes.

As the NCAA and Big 10 are made up of universities that also have to follow these same norms and laws, it's kind of hard for them to keep Penn State in their clubs without some kind of sanction.

If Penn State were actually a classy organization, and not despicably corrupted, they'd voluntarily suspend their season. But, they're not going to do it, so someone needs to do it. Someone has to, and the NCAA can't keep a reputation as a credible organization of universities and still allow PSU to remain unpunished.

sixone, you are defending evil. This is why you attracted an demonic troll to this thread and why I heaped abuse upon you.

Just leave the thread, it will improve your life.

Thank you for being big enough to apologize.

Penn State's president and any other administrator, faculty, or staff who conspired to conceal Sandusky's crimes should be ousted and punished to the fullest extent of all criminal and civil laws. No exceptions. I think we agree on that.

But those who didn't have direct knowledge of the crimes and/or the cover-up should not be accused of evil, or held responsible for the wrongdoing of others. THAT would be evil.

The NCAA can't keep a reputation as a credible organization by swooping in after the fact to collect fines and penalize the innocent. That behavior only rewards hiding wrongdoing, instead of stopping it.

 

[cronos]

The NCAA can't keep a reputation as a credible organization by swooping in after the fact to collect fines and penalize the innocent.

And what everybody else have been trying to tell you is that it's the exact opposite.

The only way NCAA can keep its reputation is to be consistent and dish out the punishment just as it always has. The precedence are there. USC and OSU are the most recent and high profile ones. The perpetrators on these cases were mostly all gone to the pros and escaped the punishments, but the schools still get the suspensions/post season bans/scholarship cut/etc.

If the NCAA ended up deciding to do nothing to PSU (because all the perpetrators were already prosecuted by the law/on trials, according to your argument), when the issue is clearly (I think we can all agree to this) much more serious than what happened at USC and OSU, *then* the NCAA loses all its credibility. It is exactly the opposite of what you're saying above.

 

[sixone]

And what everybody else have been trying to tell you is that it's the exact opposite.

The only way NCAA can keep its reputation is to be consistent and dish out the punishment just as it always has. The precedence are there. USC and OSU are the most recent and high profile ones. The perpetrators on these cases were mostly all gone to the pros and escaped the punishments, but the schools still get the suspensions/post season bans/scholarship cut/etc.

If the NCAA ended up deciding to do nothing to PSU (because all the perpetrators were already prosecuted by the law/on trials, according to your argument), when the issue is clearly (I think we can all agree to this) much more serious than what happened at USC and OSU, *then* the NCAA loses all its credibility. It is exactly the opposite of what you're saying above.

And that's the culture that discourages whistleblowers from coming forward. Why bother to be proactive, if your school will just be punished anyway? If there's any chance of getting away with it, there's no incentive not to try.

I don't know what you call credibility, but that ain't it, IMHO.

 

[zinfamous]

I don't know what you call credibility, but that ain't it, IMHO.

yes, yes: you have made it plain in your posting history at AT that your perception of credibility is vastly different from that of everyone else.

 

[RPD]

And that's the culture that discourages whistleblowers from coming forward. Why bother to be proactive, if your school will just be punished anyway? If there's any chance of getting away with it, there's no incentive not to try.

I don't know what you call credibility, but that ain't it, IMHO.

Logic, this post contains none of it.

 

[momeNt]

yeah. you pretty much deserve to lose your football team because of this attitude.

I was mimicking the Freshman quarterback and newly elected trustee that espouse the very ideas I was sarcastically relaying to you all. Just to show everyone how sick Penn state football fans can be, and how blinded they can be to child rape.

 

[momeNt]

And that's the culture that discourages whistleblowers from coming forward. Why bother to be proactive, if your school will just be punished anyway? If there's any chance of getting away with it, there's no incentive not to try.

I don't know what you call credibility, but that ain't it, IMHO.

The punishment your school receives has absolutely nothing to do with the crimes being committed.

You've tipped your hand, you've shown an extreme ethical shortfall that you can even fathom to think that a whistleblower should be concerned for even one instant about the punishment their school receives when the consequences of whistleblowing stops the rape of children.

Go away.

 

[sixone]

The punishment your school receives has absolutely nothing to do with the crimes being committed.

You've tipped your hand, you've shown an extreme ethical shortfall that you can even fathom to think that a whistleblower should be concerned for even one instant about the punishment their school receives when the consequences of whistleblowing stops the rape of children.

Go away.

Yes, that was my point. Are you agreeing with me?

 

[momeNt]

Yes, that was my point. Are you agreeing with me?

If you think that the culture exists in Penn State, you need to death penalty the school. I think the school needs to lose its football program because that program perpetuated that culture. So if a few hundred thouand/million alum lose their program, too damn bad.