Califan007 The Constipated Posted October 5, 2019 Share Posted October 5, 2019 Anyway, I just want to sum up my feelings on this subject in one post.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skinsinparadise Posted October 5, 2019 Share Posted October 5, 2019 1 hour ago, Califan007 said: Actually, I'm saying that even if they had the motive/desire/lack of character to want to smear Jay, this specific and particular way of doing it makes absolutely zero sense and strains credibility. It would be like if I had cheated on my wife of 10 years several times, and then one day she accused me of cheating on her last night...with Salma Hayek. My response would be "1) She's married to a billionaire, 2) she lives in Spain, 3) I haven't left the state in 3 years, 4) where the hell would I have met Salma Hayek?" Now, whether or not she has a valid reason for ever thinking I may have cheated again, the scenario she spelled out of me flying to Spain to have sex with Salma Hayek makes no sense whatsoever lol...and saying "yeah, but you've done this in the past and you came home late last night and you said she was attractive" doesn't trump the rest. Is your point that Dan-Bruce's angle here would be to mess with Jay's marriage? Hence you dispute the credibility and timing of doing it so far after the fact? Or is it just that it happened 2 years ago? I just want to be clear on your point before I respond to this. If I got you wrong if you don't mind please let me know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Califan007 The Constipated Posted October 5, 2019 Share Posted October 5, 2019 3 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said: Is your point that Dan-Bruce's angle here would be to mess with Jay's marriage? Hence you dispute the credibility and timing of doing it so far after the fact? I just want to be clear on your point before I respond to this. If I got you wrong if you don't mind please let me know. What? No lol...nothing to do with Jay's marriage, at all. That was just using a made-up example to make a point. And to post a pic of Salma lol... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skinsinparadise Posted October 5, 2019 Share Posted October 5, 2019 2 minutes ago, Califan007 said: What? No lol...nothing to do with Jay's marriage, at all. That was just using a made-up example to make a point. And to post a pic of Salma lol... Ok, got it I think, so I assume you mean that because it was 2 years ago and the particulars of the content? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Probos Posted October 5, 2019 Share Posted October 5, 2019 55 minutes ago, Califan007 said: 2) I think saying "anything is possible" when it comes to Bruce and Dan is kind of copping out. As if saying that is all that needs to be said on the matter, no further explanation or analysis necessary. "copping out"? So, you think it's not possible that Dan and/or Bruce would not be involved in anyway in "leaking" this video? The timing is spot on considering the current state of the team. Dan/Bruce taking massive criticism (and rightly so),..as well as Jay. He is dead man walking so let's make him look as bad as possible before we get rid of him. It does almost seem absurd doesn't,.....but fits their bumbling ways. But,...I guess there's always a chance it's just some random guy on Twitter having fun. This fooking franchise is a mess, an embarrassment,...a joke. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickyJ Posted October 5, 2019 Share Posted October 5, 2019 2 minutes ago, Probos said: "copping out"? So, you think it's not possible that Dan and/or Bruce would not be involved in anyway in "leaking" this video? The timing is spot on considering the current state of the team. Dan/Bruce taking massive criticism (and rightly so),..as well as Jay. He is dead man walking so let's make him look as bad as possible before we get rid of him. It does almost seem absurd doesn't,.....but fits their bumbling ways. This fooking franchise is a mess, an embarrassment,...a joke. The team has bumbling ways. But these bumbling morons brilliantly find, hide, and then resurface a video that may be multiple years old? They made everyone in that crowd disappear, not a single one with a recording of Jay, and the person who filmed it not leaking it out ahead of time? Which is it, bumbling or brilliant? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sacks 'n' Stuff Posted October 5, 2019 Share Posted October 5, 2019 On 10/4/2019 at 3:20 PM, Mr. Sinister said: I'd even tolerate rails of coke. I have probably been the biggest advocate on this board for infusing Redskins culture with copious amounts of cocaine. I’m not sure how you watch our pass rushing impotence year after year and not realize that I’ve been right about that all along. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Califan007 The Constipated Posted October 5, 2019 Share Posted October 5, 2019 13 minutes ago, Probos said: "copping out"? So, you think it's not possible that Dan and/or Bruce would not be involved in anyway in "leaking" this video? The timing is spot on considering the current state of the team. Dan/Bruce taking massive criticism (and rightly so),..as well as Jay. He is dead man walking so let's make him look as bad as possible before we get rid of him. It does almost seem absurd doesn't,.....but fits their bumbling ways. But,...I guess there's always a chance it's just some random guy on Twitter having fun. This fooking franchise is a mess, an embarrassment,...a joke. Double negative aside lol...there are way too many illogical and unrealistic aspects to this being the brainchild of Bruce and Dan to ignore. I mean, I'll start by just asking one question: Who is the guy who posted the video? A ) Bruce under a burner account to smear Gruden B ) Someone working with Bruce and Dan to smear Gruden C ) Some skins fan who had what he thought was a funny video of Gruden and posted it For me, if you answer either A or B, there are a lot of follow-up questions to be answered before things can start to make sense. If you answer C, that explains everything and no need to go further. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Probos Posted October 5, 2019 Share Posted October 5, 2019 4 minutes ago, NickyJ said: The team has bumbling ways. But these bumbling morons brilliantly find, hide, and then resurface a video that may be multiple years old? They made everyone in that crowd disappear, not a single one with a recording of Jay, and the person who filmed it not leaking it out ahead of time? Which is it, bumbling or brilliant? Sure, could be from years ago, who knows. If it is would explain the lack or other videos, but, I find the timing of the leak interesting. I'm probably wrong, but there's no way I'm defending this joke of a FO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickyJ Posted October 5, 2019 Share Posted October 5, 2019 5 minutes ago, Probos said: Sure, could be from years ago, who knows. If it is would explain the lack or other videos, but, I find the timing of the leak interesting. I'm probably wrong, but there's no way I'm defending this joke of a FO. In the end, this is what I'm looking for. People that are self-aware that it's absurd, that's fair enough. I've done with things many times. But people that actually truly believe what they're peddling.... that amazes me lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Probos Posted October 5, 2019 Share Posted October 5, 2019 11 minutes ago, Califan007 said: Double negative aside lol...there are way too many illogical and unrealistic aspects to this being the brainchild of Bruce and Dan to ignore. I mean, I'll start by just asking one question: Who is the guy who posted the video? A ) Bruce under a burner account to smear Gruden B ) Someone working with Bruce and Dan to smear Gruden C ) Some skins fan who had what he thought was a funny video of Gruden and posted it For me, if you answer either A or B, there are a lot of follow-up questions to be answered before things can start to make sense. If you answer C, that explains everything and no need to go further. I was over zealous with the word "not",...obviously. ha,.. Sure, I suppose C is the easier answer and more than plausible. A,...nah. B -- possible. Who knows,..and I'm sure we'll never know for sure. The only thing I know for sure is the FO stinks and is mostly responsible for the current state of the franchise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goskins10 Posted October 5, 2019 Share Posted October 5, 2019 For me there care 3 categories here: 1. What is possible - So @Califan007 (and Califan, you will want to read the entire comment before responding) you asked for it and i cannot believe people did not answer - Would Dan or Bruce actually post themselves? Of course not. Someone that works for them comes in and says, hey I found this, what do you want me to do with it? They say, what can we do with it? Well we could drop through an anonymous source if you wanted or we can tell Jay about it so he has a heads up it's out there. He may not know. If it was found some time ago they say let's sit on this. May need it. They it comes to them firing Jay and Bruce says, hey maybe it's time to drop those videos. And there you have it, easy as pie. And there is no doubt in my mind that Bruce especially is low class enough to do something like this to create a scapegoat. In fact, I would not be surprised if it were all Bruce without Dan knowing. Can I say Worm tongue! 2. What's provable. Here is where it comes off the rails. There is little to no way to prove anything. So it's really kind of a moot point. Sure it's possible and if you want to believe they did this somehow you can. But it's very unlikely there ever be any proof. It is just so easy to get something like this dropped without a trace. It's what makes it such a cowardly act. I for one cannot blame them without some more tangible evidence. Evidence that i believe would be near impossible to get. 3. What I believe - or care about - I really do not care who did it, especially without proof. There are plenty enough things that I can prove to make me hate both dan and bruce that I do not need to add any speculation. So unless I find some proof, I will work on the assumption this was not them. Whoever the cowards were that did this are scum of the earth. They need to be buried below the jails. Unfortunately they can hide behind a huge net of anonymity. By all accounts Jay is good guy. You can argue about his ability as a HC, but he is pretty stand up guy. And to have some kind of attempt to smear him like this is just garbage. He and his family do not deserve this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Califan007 The Constipated Posted October 5, 2019 Share Posted October 5, 2019 18 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said: Ok, got it I think, so I assume you mean that because it was 2 years ago and the particulars of the content? What?...I'm confused about what you're asking me here lol... - I don't know when the video was taken, I just know that it was highly unlikely to have been taken back in 2005 - I can't begin to piece together the scenario in which Bruce, Dan, and this random guy all ended up conspiring to smear Gruden, regardless of how much smearing Gruden would fit into Bruce and Dan's past behavior - Nothing about the account points to it being a fake burner account 3 minutes ago, Probos said: I was over zealous with the word "not",...obviously. ha,.. Sure, I suppose C is the easier answer and more than plausible. A,...nah. B -- possible. Who knows,..and I'm sure we'll never know for sure. 3 LOL @ the bold part 😂 I actually expect more videos of Jay that night to surface...you can see multiple people with iPhones in the video, I'm guessing more than one person realized who Jay was. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Voice_of_Reason Posted October 5, 2019 Share Posted October 5, 2019 1 hour ago, Hooper said: Overruling the football people to take Haskins at 15. I went through why that’s not a knee jerk reaction. It is meddling. But it’s not knee jerk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Probos Posted October 5, 2019 Share Posted October 5, 2019 11 minutes ago, Califan007 said: What?...I'm confused about what you're asking me here lol... - I don't know when the video was taken, I just know that it was highly unlikely to have been taken back in 2005 - I can't begin to piece together the scenario in which Bruce, Dan, and this random guy all ended up conspiring to smear Gruden, regardless of how much smearing Gruden would fit into Bruce and Dan's past behavior - Nothing about the account points to it being a fake burner account LOL @ the bold part 😂 I actually expect more videos of Jay that night to surface...you can see multiple people with iPhones in the video, I'm guessing more than one person realized who Jay was. Sure,..there may be more vids. I guess we'll see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Califan007 The Constipated Posted October 5, 2019 Share Posted October 5, 2019 6 minutes ago, goskins10 said: For me there care 3 categories here: 1. What is possible - So @Califan007 (and Califan, you will want to read the entire comment before responding) you asked for it and i cannot believe people did not answer - Would Dan or Bruce actually post themselves? Of course not. Someone that works for them comes in and says, hey I found this, what do you want me to do with it? They say, what can we do with it? Well we could drop through an anonymous source if you wanted or we can tell Jay about it so he has a heads up it's out there. He may not know. If it was found some time ago they say let's sit on this. May need it. They it comes to them firing Jay and Bruce says, hey maybe it's time to drop those videos. And there you have it, easy as pie. And there is no doubt in my mind that Bruce especially is low class enough to do something like this to create a scapegoat. In fact, I would not be surprised if it were all Bruce without Dan knowing. Can I say Worm tongue! 2. What's provable. Here is where it comes off the rails. There is little to no way to prove anything. So it's really kind of a moot point. Sure it's possible and if you want to believe they did this somehow you can. But it's very unlikely there ever be any proof. It is just so easy to get something like this dropped without a trace. It's what makes it such a cowardly act. I for one cannot blame them without some more tangible evidence. Evidence that i believe would be near impossible to get. 3. What I believe - or care about - I really do not care who did it, especially without proof. There are plenty enough things that I can prove to make me hate both dan and bruce that I do not need to add any speculation. So unless I find some proof, I will work on the assumption this was not them. Whoever the cowards were that did this are scum of the earth. They need to be buried below the jails. Unfortunately they can hide behind a huge net of anonymity. By all accounts Jay is good guy. You can argue about his ability as a HC, but he is pretty stand up guy. And to have some kind of attempt to smear him like this is just garbage. He and his family do not deserve this. Ok, so in your #1 the anonymous source was the guy who posted it on twitter? Or did the anonymous source drop it TO the guy who posted it? I'm assuming it's the former, because if it was the latter then he would have mentioned that he received the video anonymously...it didn't look like he did anything other than make a joke of it. Plus, in at least the convo I posted above, it appears he was there at the time of the videotaping, if not the actual person who videotaped it on his phone. So if it's an anonymous dropping of the video, it would have to come with the instructions of taking credit for videotaping it...either that, or saying he was there when it happened. These add an extra layer to the conspiracy that still doesn't make sense. And this overlooks the multitude of others there that night who also had phones and who may have also videotaped Gruden, and Dan and Bruce would have no idea what those videos showed. What if that really was his wife and not some 20 year old coed? What if the reason he sat on the ground was because his wife wanted to sit but didn't want to sit directly on the sidewalk so he sat down to let her sit on his leg? (for the record, I've done that for my ex-wife, which is what made me think of it)...I mean, any number of things could make Gruden look better or worse... And the farther back the video was taken, the less sense it makes unless you truly believe that Allen just randomly collects dirt on everyone he works with in order to smear them with it, even if that smearing happens 5 years or more down the road. For me, if anyone believes that, it's based on their pre-existing perception of Bruce Allen more than off of what makes sense. "It sounds like something he'd do" is the foundation for those beliefs...which is really "It sounds like something I have no trouble believing he'd do". I don't recall anyone saying Allen is known for having a dossier of sorts on people with all their dirty laundry, or even hinting that he does. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skinsinparadise Posted October 6, 2019 Share Posted October 6, 2019 35 minutes ago, Califan007 said: What?...I'm confused about what you're asking me here lol... - I don't know when the video was taken, I just know that it was highly unlikely to have been taken back in 2005 - I can't begin to piece together the scenario in which Bruce, Dan, and this random guy all ended up conspiring to smear Gruden, regardless of how much smearing Gruden would fit into Bruce and Dan's past behavior - Nothing about the account points to it being a fake burner account From my experience it doesn't have to be a burner account, though. And if you are using a burner account you don't want to be so stupid and just activate it and then days later do something. You want to establish some credibility. The art of it is making it look non-obvious. If it's obvious then you are doing it wrong. You are trying to give an innocent-organic look to it. And heck often you don't even need burner accounts. Some people friendly to the cause type people are more than willing to bring things out themselves on their own accounts. Or said person could simply be close to another person who wants it out -- that happens a lot, too. This stuff is sadly so run of the mill in my business that I am not fazed by it. I am never executing this part of the campaign myself -- thank god. But I am on conference calls frequently where there is a discussion about how to get information out social media wise. Heck some digital-social media consultants actually use as their selling point that they provide credible looking burners. If its a burner account you want it to be alive for quite some time otherwise it's too obvious. I have colleagues who have multiple burner accounts that they've had open for years. But often it's just friendly people to the cause and you just ask them to do it in their own name. The top dog (the candidate) is rarely talking to that person in play its typically some underling. Is that going on here? You got me. But there is nothing about the execution of this that makes me think its slam dunk so innocently looking -- as if no way could Dan-Bruce be involved. The whole point in doing it right is leaving that type of feeling like no way it could be them. Much of the time on the calls am on when the topic is brought up is spent on how to make it look organic. And video is the holy grail right now of social media (at least in my profession) you get about 5 times the clicks than you would of an article or any written word. My gut is this isn't orchestrated by them. I can't though rule it out as if its preposterous though. For me a lot of it would depend on what's going on right now with Jay and the powers that be. And we don't have the answer to that. Also, if he does get canned on Monday it increases my suspicion. Conversely if he isn't canned it lessens my suspicion greatly. Not that am heavily suspicious at the moment but I have a hard time ruling it out either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goskins10 Posted October 6, 2019 Share Posted October 6, 2019 1 minute ago, Califan007 said: Ok, so in your #1 the anonymous source was the guy who posted it on twitter? Or did the anonymous source drop it TO the guy who posted it? I'm assuming it's the former, because if it was the latter then he would have mentioned that he received the video anonymously...it didn't look like he did anything other than make a joke of it. Plus, in at least the convo I posted above, it appears he was there at the time of the videotaping, if not the actual person who videotaped it on his phone. So if it's an anonymous dropping of the video, it would have to come with the instructions of taking credit for videotaping it...either that, or saying he was there when it happened. These add an extra layer to the conspiracy that still doesn't make sense. And this overlooks the multitude of others there that night who also had phones and who may have also videotaped Gruden, and Dan and Bruce would have no idea what those videos showed. What if that really was his wife and not some 20 year old coed? What if the reason he sat on the ground was because his wife wanted to sit but didn't want to sit directly on the sidewalk so he sat down to let her sit on his leg? (for the record, I've done that for my ex-wife, which is what made me think of it)...I mean, any number of things could make Gruden look better or worse... And the farther back the video was taken, the less sense it makes unless you truly believe that Allen just randomly collects dirt on everyone he works with in order to smear them with it, even if that smearing happens 5 years or more down the road. For me, if anyone believes that, it's based on their pre-existing perception of Bruce Allen more than off of what makes sense. "It sounds like something he'd do" is the foundation for those beliefs...which is really "It sounds like something I have no trouble believing he'd do". I don't recall anyone saying Allen is known for having a dossier of sorts on people with all their dirty laundry, or even hinting that he does. Not sure it you purposely ignore entire parts of posts - or just get too impatient and start writing a response before finishing. I never said they did it or that I even think they did. You asked is it possible and if so how. It is indeed possible and I said how. If you really do not think it's possible then you purposely turning a blind eye, or doing your typical playing devils advocate just because you like to argue (I do not say that to be ugly - face it you love the heat of the battle. You love getting into these minutia discussions) and I am not about to waste the next 3 to 5 pages discussing the minutia because quite frankly I do not care enough. There are a million ways to do it if you want to - from both angles. But the important part of this is can you prove it. The answer to that is no and I said so. You can ask all the little minutia questions you want trying in some effort that I can only take at this point to somehow prove there is no way that Dan or Bruce had anything to do with it, but if so you are just as much pissing in the wind as those saying that to a certainty Dan and Bruce are for sure responsible. Neither can be proved so who cares. Is it possible? Yes. It is absolutely possible. Did they do it? No way to prove it so each person will likely go with what they want to believe with or without facts. In the end I personally don't know or care but will work on the assumption they had nothing to do with it since I see no proof they did. They were dropped and it was a cowardly thing to do to what I think is a pretty nice guy who has done nothing but try to work within this ****ed up franchise until finally he is being eaten up - not by this crap - but by the inexcusably dysfunctional organization bruce and dan like to run. He is very likely to be fired come Monday morning if any of the reports are to be believed. Even if not Monday he certainly appears to be dead man walking based on performance. He is not without blame for sure, but he was not given much support either - at least not from where I sit. i truly believe he will land on his feet and still has time to do some good in the league. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skinsinparadise Posted October 6, 2019 Share Posted October 6, 2019 52 minutes ago, goskins10 said: 1. What is possible - So @Califan007 (and Califan, you will want to read the entire comment before responding) you asked for it and i cannot believe people did not answer - Would Dan or Bruce actually post themselves? Of course not. Someone that works for them comes in and says, hey I found this, what do you want me to do with it? They say, what can we do with it? Well we could drop through an anonymous source if you wanted or we can tell Jay about it so he has a heads up it's out there. He may not know. If it was found some time ago they say let's sit on this. May need it. They it comes to them firing Jay and Bruce says, hey maybe it's time to drop those videos. And there you have it, easy as pie. And there is no doubt in my mind that Bruce especially is low class enough to do something like this to create a scapegoat. In fact, I would not be surprised if it were all Bruce without Dan knowing. Can I say Worm tongue! @goskins10 does a better job bringing home my point than I did. Yeah this stuff isn't hard to do. Dan, Jay, Bruce all together might be aware of the video and have even joked about it. Lets say Dan-Bruce go out for drinks recently and say hey we might have to let Jay go. Bruce is aware that he's also taking heat from the fans some of whom see this as a Batman-Robin narrative where he and Jay are targets simultaneously and wants to keep the focus on Jay. At that point he gets one of his underlings who knows someone with that video to egg on the guy to release it or they just get another person they know to release it or whatever. Getting the video out isn't hard. There could be a zillion permutations of it. You can't really focus on just one scenario. But yeah info like this is leaked all the time in my profession. There is zero weirdness to me about the execution of it. If anything it looks too much by the book as for the timing of it. The timing of the leak is very well done. The timing doesn't look organic at all. Is that what's happening here? you got me. But I wouldn't put it past the powers that be here. My gut is that it was organic but its tough for me to rule out that it was orchestrated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Califan007 The Constipated Posted October 6, 2019 Share Posted October 6, 2019 9 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said: From my experience it doesn't have to be a burner account, though. And if you are using a burner account you don't want to be so stupid and just activate it and then days later do something. You want to establish some credibility. The art of it is making it look non-obvious. If it's obvious then you are doing it wrong. You are trying to give an innocent-organic look to it. And heck often you don't even need burner accounts. Some people friendly to the cause type people are more than willing to bring things out themselves on their own accounts. Or said person could simply be close to another person who wants it out -- that happens a lot, too. This stuff is sadly so run of the mill in my business that I am not fazed by it. I am never executing this part of the campaign myself -- thank god. But I am on conference calls frequently where there is a discussion about how to get information out social media wise. Heck some digital-social media consultants actually use as their selling point that they provide credible looking burners. If its a burner account you want it to be alive for quite some time otherwise it's too obvious. I have colleagues who have multiple burner accounts that they've had open for years. But often it's just friendly people to the cause and you just ask them to do it in their own name. The top dog (the candidate) is rarely talking to that person in play its typically some underling. Is that going on here? You got me. But there is nothing about the execution of this that makes me think its slam dunk so innocently looking -- as if no way could Dan-Bruce be involved. The whole point in doing it right is leaving that type of feeling like no way it could be them. Much of the time on the calls am on when the topic is brought up is spent on how to make it look organic. And video is the holy grail right now of social media (at least in my profession) you get about 5 times the clicks than you would of an article or any written word. My gut is this isn't orchestrated by them. I can't though rule it out as if its preposterous though. For me a lot of it would depend on what's going on right now with Jay and the powers that be. And we don't have the answer to that. Also, if he does get canned on Monday it increases my suspicion. Conversely if he isn't canned it lessens my suspicion greatly. Not that am heavily suspicious at the moment but I have a hard time ruling it out either. This guy's account was started in August of 2009...so for it to be a burner account it would mean Bruce was planning this even before he was hired by the Redskins. And he would have purposefully been trying to amass followers solely for the purposes of hiding the account's true goals and motives. Which means genuine content would have to be created to encourage 5,000 people to end up following him. This is a helluva lot of work for the account's only use ending up being to drop a video of Jay Gruden that's not all that bad. Yes, it's possible that Bruce always has a burner account at the ready run by someone he trusts, just in case...and that when he started it, it wasn't with the Redskins in mind but for whoever may have hired him. And yeah, he could have accumulated tons of stuff on everyone he's worked with for the purposes of releasing it here and there to help advance himself in an organization or just does it without any real intent in mind simply because he's corrupt enough to enjoy that ****, destroying reputations just for kicks. All theoretically possible, but it's so close to unlikely that imo it's not worth considering. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skinsinparadise Posted October 6, 2019 Share Posted October 6, 2019 8 minutes ago, Califan007 said: This guy's account was started in August of 2009...so for it to be a burner account it would mean Bruce was planning this even before he was hired by the Redskins. And he would have purposefully been trying to amass followers solely for the purposes of hiding the account's true goals and motives. Which means genuine content would have to be created to encourage 5,000 people to end up following him. This is a helluva lot of work for the account's only use ending up being to drop a video of Jay Gruden that's not all that bad. Yes, it's possible that Bruce always has a burner account at the ready run by someone he trusts, just in case...and that when he started it, it wasn't with the Redskins in mind but for whoever may have hired him. And yeah, he could have accumulated tons of stuff on everyone he's worked with for the purposes of releasing it here and there to help advance himself in an organization or just does it without any real intent in mind simply because he's corrupt enough to enjoy that ****, destroying reputations just for kicks. All theoretically possible, but it's so close to unlikely that imo it's not worth considering. I'll give you an example. Like in Redskins Park, I've worked in organizations with 30-40 people, etc. We got interns, volunteers, etc. One common way to do it is in a meeting with lets say 10 college students -- where you go look can one of you guys-gals get one of your friends to do you a solid and put this out? Especially when it comes to a video. A video like that could come from anywhere. So really anyone can put it out and it wouldn't look weird as long as they are from somewhat near that immediate area. I get bugged about it myself sometimes from a client where they ask me to help. It doesn't have to be something wild and crazy. I get asked can my wife put this out on facebook or can I get someone else I know do it When you hire social media consultants they often volunteer to just figure this stuff out for you. As for it not being worth considering -- I'd agree if Dan didn't have a reputation of smearing people who are about to leave but alas thats not the case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Califan007 The Constipated Posted October 6, 2019 Share Posted October 6, 2019 11 minutes ago, goskins10 said: Not sure it you purposely ignore entire parts of posts - or just get too impatient and start writing a response before finishing. I never said they did it or that I even think they did. You asked is it possible and if so how. It is indeed possible and I said how. If you really do not think it's possible then you purposely turning a blind eye, or doing your typical playing devils advocate just because you like to argue (I do not say that to be ugly - face it you love the heat of the battle. You love getting into these minutia discussions) and I am not about to waste the next 3 to 5 pages discussing the minutia because quite frankly I do not care enough. There are a million ways to do it if you want to - from both angles. 2 My response was to show that your "What Is Possible" section was actually not very possible at all. And I showed why. Had nothing whatsoever to do with what you believed, and had everything to do with the validity of the scenario you painted. Too much was ignored in your scenario, and I brought up some of it. And I've already said I enjoy debating. I think a lot of people here take debate personally. I don't. I don't know you, you don't know me. even people here who try to insult me don't make a dent lol...it would be like someone online calling me an elderly Asian woman. I mean, I'm not one lol...so all I can do is shake my head and laugh in response. If someone is debating a topic with me and I instantly see logic holes in their argument, I'll point them out with the belief that they understand that's how debate works. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koolblue13 Posted October 6, 2019 Share Posted October 6, 2019 I love that this contains serious discussion almost as much as a Selma Hayak nipple reference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BatteredFanSyndrome Posted October 6, 2019 Share Posted October 6, 2019 I have to wonder if other forums for putrid sports franchises get this far in the weeds about things that have nothing to do with the sport. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goskins10 Posted October 6, 2019 Share Posted October 6, 2019 1 minute ago, Califan007 said: My response was to show that your "What Is Possible" section was actually not very possible at all. And I showed why. Had nothing whatsoever to do with what you believed, and had everything to do with the validity of the scenario you painted. Too much was ignored in your scenario, and I brought up some of it. And I've already said I enjoy debating. I think a lot of people here take debate personally. I don't. I don't know you, you don't know me. even people here who try to insult me don't make a dent lol...it would be like someone online calling me an elderly Asian woman. I mean, I'm not one lol...so all I can do is shake my head and laugh in response. If someone is debating a topic with me and I instantly see logic holes in their argument, I'll point them out with the belief that they understand that's how debate works. But you did not prove that it's not that possible. You are deliberately ignoring that this **** happens all the time - and I mean all the time. It's just not that hard. If you want to continue to believe that it cannot just because you cannot see it in your world, then that's fine. Certainly up to you. But it happens a lot. And there are people that specialize in **** exactly like this. They are cowardly cretins but there are enough other cretins out there that they make a very good living by doing stuff like this and making it look innocent or coincidental. Believe it, don;t believe it. Up to you. And I purposely made the argue comment the way I did so as not to mean it personally. If it still came off as a personal attack - regardless of if you took it that way - please know it was not my intent. We all enjoy the argument to some extent or we would not be here. But you have to admit you certainly enjoy a bit more than most - and again that is not some personal attack. Just an observation. And while for some issues I would be glad to engage, I don't care enough about this one to continue. I don't know if they had anything to do with it but it's plausible. But since i can't prove it then I will operate under the assumption they had nothing to do with it. I hate dan and bruce enough already. Don't really need any help to get there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.