Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
cjain
Mountain climber
Lake Forest, CA
|
|
|
Topic Author's Original Post - Aug 5, 2006 - 03:37pm PT
|
(From http://www.storyarts.org/library/aesops/stories/boy.html Commentary follows)
The Boy Who Cried Wolf
There once was a shepherd boy who was bored as he sat on the hillside watching the village sheep. To amuse himself he took a great breath and sang out, "Wolf! Wolf! The Wolf is chasing the sheep!"
The villagers came running up the hill to help the boy drive the wolf away. But when they arrived at the top of the hill, they found no wolf. The boy laughed at the sight of their angry faces.
"Don't cry 'wolf', shepherd boy," said the villagers, "when there's no wolf!" They went grumbling back down the hill.
Later, the boy sang out again, "Wolf! Wolf! The wolf is chasing the sheep!" To his naughty delight, he watched the villagers run up the hill to help him drive the wolf away.
When the villagers saw no wolf they sternly said, "Save your frightened song for when there is really something wrong! Don't cry 'wolf' when there is NO wolf!"
But the boy just grinned and watched them go grumbling down the hill once more.
Later, he saw a REAL wolf prowling about his flock. Alarmed, he leaped to his feet and sang out as loudly as he could, "Wolf! Wolf!"
But the villagers thought he was trying to fool them again, and so they didn't come.
At sunset, everyone wondered why the shepherd boy hadn't returned to the village with their sheep. They went up the hill to find the boy. They found him weeping.
"There really was a wolf here! The flock has scattered! I cried out, "Wolf!" Why didn't you come?"
An old man tried to comfort the boy as they walked back to the village.
"We'll help you look for the lost sheep in the morning," he said, putting his arm around the youth, "Nobody believes a liar...even when he is telling the truth!"
===
'Pass the Pitons' Pete wrote:
"need your input on this asap please! This story is true. Can you please offer your input right now? ...
"I have a friend who is in a huge moral dilemma. His entire career and livelihood are on the line. Most likely he will be required to provide an answer on Monday, so there is a deadline....
"Responses please, and hurry!
Pete"
===
Pete,
Should you REALLY urgently need help for a friend in the future, I wish my response would be less cynical then I fear it would be.
|
|
'Pass the Pitons' Pete
Big Wall climber
like Oakville, Ontario, Canada, eh?
|
|
I'm sorry if I upset anyone. That was clearly not my intent. I wrote the post about Richard to make you think.
He has been shat upon for years, and it was the single story I could tell about him that shows he is a man of integrity.
In my defense I had NO IDEA the volume of responses the post would receive - that truly amazed me.
I am also aware that this sort of thing can affect my credibility negatively, but if that's what it costs me to "stand in the gap" for my friend, then I will accept that.
I seldom troll my lure for fish, but I have been a successful angler all my life. In this instance, at least I used barbless hooks. I try to practise "catch and release" whenever possible. My post was not mean-spirited. If you are one who has been caught, and this offends you, I do apologize.
Peter Zabrok
Oakville, Ontario
|
|
Crimpergirl
Sport climber
St. Louis
|
|
No offense taken here. I don't view any of this as personal.
But, there appears to be far more to the episode than was mentioned in your post (see links posted on the original).
|
|
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
Thanks Pete. Apology Accepted.
Peace
Karl
|
|
cjain
Mountain climber
Lake Forest, CA
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Aug 5, 2006 - 04:46pm PT
|
Pete writes:
"In my defense I had NO IDEA the volume of responses the post would receive - that truly amazed me."
Yeah, isn't is amazing how quickly to people are to drop everything and come to a friend (or in this case, a friend of a friend) in true need? (I'm being sarcastic.)
This board is full of troll postings and I am not easily offended, but I found your post to be offensive in a way that most trolls are not.
I sense that you honestly surprised and disturbed that you offended people and you honestly regret it. So I accept your apology.
But I do not sense you "get it" as why your post is offensive.
EDIT: Pete, your post did raise a very interesting issue and led to a very interesting thread, but I think you the thread could have been equally successful (over a longer period of time) without the false urgency.
|
|
'Pass the Pitons' Pete
Big Wall climber
like Oakville, Ontario, Canada, eh?
|
|
I agree - the false urgency was a mistake. I completely underestimated the McTopo community's willingness to respond. I really just expected a few hits, and I remain overwhelmed and thankful for your heartfelt and immediate responses from so very many people!
Many thanks.
Edit: I subsequently tried to remove the "urgent" bit from the title, but the forum doesn't let you edit that part.
|
|
madbolter1
Big Wall climber
Walla Walla, WA
|
|
I stand amazed. Where to even begin to respond to all this???
First, I did tell Pete that his email pointing out this thread to me had me in tears, but probably not for the reason you might think. Actually, the reason is that Pete's email (and what he was clearly trying to accomplish in this thread) so clearly revealed to me what a friend Pete has become. Readers looking at the past WoS threads will clearly see that Pete wasn't cutting us any slack, so Mark and I were honestly concerned that Pete's "SA attempt" was going to be a sandbag, where he "reported" the "party line," and the same old song and dance about the route would continue. We went down to the Valley to offer some beta on the route in the hopes that Pete would prove to be an honest guy, and we found that he, Tom, and Randy were much more than that. We came away from that time together as friends, and Pete's email pointing out this thread really touched me as I saw the depth of his understanding of me. So, whatever has been Pete's "error" in this effort, I understand what he was trying to accomplish for me, and that I very much appreciate.
Now, of course, as I saw what this thread was about, I clearly realized that this would open up yet another can of worms. (I have been at Smith Rocks from Friday, until just now, which is why I haven't posted anything sooner.) So, what I am going to do in the next post (that will take some time to compose) is produce a synopsis of the events, which you can take as you will. I don't intend to get dragged into a game of accounting for why I did x instead of y, and I guess people will form whatever opinions of my character they want. But I'm not going to start fighting on two fronts: WoS and WWC. Mark and I decided to fight hard about WoS about 1 1/2 years ago on these threads, and the truth is coming out. However, I don't intend to "fight hard" to rationalize my actions at WWC. The only reason I am even attempting to clarify matters at this point is that I honor Pete for what he started here, and there have been some really honest and inciteful replies on this thread that I honor as well. So, in the next post, I'll outline the story.
|
|
Mimi
Trad climber
Seattle
|
|
All hail the subman! Submerge before him!
I've never read such praise written about a subman before.
Peace and love.
|
|
madbolter1
Big Wall climber
Walla Walla, WA
|
|
Ok, I was hired at Walla Walla College (WWC) as a tenure-track philosophy professor under the History and Philosophy department. WWC is a Seventh-day Adventist, four-year university, and I had always thought that philosophy and Adventism made a good fit. I have always thought of myself as a philosopher first, a Christian second, and a Seventh-day Adventist third (order of logical priority). So, although I was a non-tenure-track instructor at Cal. State University at San Bernardino at the time, I jumped at the chance to teach philosophy at an SDA university. (I should say that I took a cut in pay to do so, and I was very highly regarded at CSUSB, so could have had my job there indefinitely.)
Everything went great at WWC for the first year. I got superb peer and student evaluations. However, from the first interview for the job, I made it clear that I have an "industry standard" academic integrity policy: If I catch a student cheating or plagiarizing, that student fails the course--not the assignment--they fail the course.
Now, I did research both before and after my WWC experience, and other academics at major universities will concur that my policy is extremely widespread. In fact, when I taught at U.C. Santa Barbara, I caught one guy cheating by looking at answers under the bill of his cap. I talked with my department and they agreed that he must fail the course. I then submitted my report of the incident to UCSB's academic standards committee, and after reviewing the incident (it was this poor kid's first offense), they concluded that I had made the policy so clear, and the kid had so blatantly violated it, that they actually expelled the kid. So, for ONE incident of cheating, this kid would find himself having trouble getting admitted to any major university in this country.
So, I went to WWC with this policy in hand, I clarified it and its implications during my interviews, and I utilized it to fail a number of students during that first year.
I should also mention that I would spend the first TWO lectures of each quarter explaining the principles of academic integrity and intellectual honesty to my students. I handed out a multi-page document outlining the various ways a person might plagiarize, and I carefully explained WHAT would happen to anyone I caught doing it and WHY my policy was that "harsh." I also encouraged students to come to me if they had the slightest question about what they were writing, so I could help them cite correctly and cast their own ideas in their best light. My students have always rated me at the top of the scale for accessibility, so nobody could ever claim that I cut them loose to fend for themselves; I have always be a very helpful teacher. Every person I caught at WWC admitted that they fully understood the policy and had just decided to risk it.
Enter the girl I will call M.E.
M.E.'s paper was such babbling horse byproducts that I initially called her in just to try to help her, to try to figure out with her what she had been trying to say. Within minutes she admitted that her history-graduate boyfriend basically told her what to write, and she just wrote it: "He was just talking out his ass, and I wrote whatever he told me. I really didn't understand any of it." I asked her if she realized that this was plagiarism in the sense that she was presenting someone else's ideas as though they were her own. She said, "Yes, I guess I though something like that at the time, but I just had no idea how to start this paper." I said, "M., didn't you hear me offering help, even outlining help, when I gave this paper assignment?" She said, "Yeah, but I just didn't have time to come in." Well, you get the drift.
I told her that I was going to write up a synopsis of what we had discussed and that I wanted her to come in the next day to look it over and sign it if it seemed accurate to her (a policy I had used repeatedly at CSUSB, and which the academic dean there had circulated as THE WAY to handle things because of its lawsuit protection value). I told her that I would rework that document with her as much as necessary to properly capture what had transpired between us.
When she came in to look the document over, as before, there was not the slightest hint of remorse. Instead, she began angling for a "sentence reduction." "If I sign this, will you give me another chance, or are you just going to fail me no matter what?"
I replied, "M., my policy is clear, and you knew it. I offered help, but you didn't take it. You knew the risk you were taking, and you took it. I am sorry, really, but you ARE going to fail this course."
She replied, "Well, then there's no point to me signing anything, is there?"
I said, "I am going to file this document along with my grade, so I'm seriously giving you the opportunity to help me shape it to be the most accurate from your perspective. But, whether you help in that process or not, and whether you sign it or not, SOME version of this document is going to the academic standards committee. This document has nothing to do with the result of your plagiarism, but I am giving you the opportunity to contribute to the perspective that the academic standards committee gets."
She then looked the document over and said, "Yeah, I guess this about says it right." So I asked her if she would sign it as it stood, and she agreed. She left, I filed my failing grade, submitted the document, and thought the incident was closed.
Next post, I'll turn to the results of this little matter....
|
|
Mimi
Trad climber
Seattle
|
|
Oh please let me introduce you to Lois!
|
|
golsen
Social climber
kennewick, wa
|
|
Pete, I posted to your "cry" for help but am not offended. Funny, I thought at the time it was related to WoS but I didnt understand the angle. Glad you made some buds on your ascent, guess it was not a failure at all!
madbolter, it is appalling that a "religious" school in little old Walla Walla would lower itself to such low regard for personal honesty in the quest for cash...I bet smith rocks was warrrmmm to say the least?
|
|
madbolter1
Big Wall climber
Walla Walla, WA
|
|
The first I realized that the M.E. incident would be different from other such failings was when the V.P. for Academic Affairs (Provost in other institutions) called me in to explain a "little problem" he was having with the incident.
As the Provost made it clear, M.E.'s daddy was a significant contributor to WWC, and he had expressed his fury that his daughter had been failed for a "first offense" like this. He considered my policy unduly harsh and "unChristlike," and he had made it clear that he "would not support an institution that so reflected an unChristlike spirit in its handling of the errors of people."
I asked the Provost, "Is he aware of how CAREFULLY and clearly my policy is stated? Does he realize that my policy is academically mainstream and that I am not some sort of ultra-harsh whacko for having a policy like this? Does he realize how flagrantly his daughter plagiarized and that she ADMITTED to it?"
The Provost swept all this aside: "It really doesn't matter. He is determined that this failing grade be removed, and the cleanest thing would be for you to just change her grade. You can cite 'administrative error' as your reason, because professors make tabulation and other errors all the time."
I replied, "So, let me be clear about this. You're asking me to make an exception in my policy for this one girl (a policy YOU have supported until now), and you're asking me to lie about why I'm changing her grade?"
He said, "I don't really care HOW your rationalize it, but the grade has got to be changed."
I said, "Changed to WHAT? I mean, seriously, at this point, even if she failed JUST that paper, she would fail the class. So, you're asking me to literally just make up a grade. Is he going to be happy with a C or a D? Or, are we really buying a vowel here?"
To this, the Provost began getting livid: "Use your judgment! You have to have SOME idea of what sort of grade she could have gotten!"
I replied, "I don't think she could have gotten an A, but beyond that, anything is possible! I mean, since I'm just making up a paper score now, why shouldn't I give it 100%? And, WHY can't she just take the course over again, like other students, and then the passing grade WILL replace this failing grade?"
The Provost said, "You have a very unChristlike spirit right now! Christ ALWAYS tried to redeem people, and you seem bent on condemning them! Why can't you just give this girl a break in this case?"
I replied, "Because I haven't given ANY other students a break like you suggest, and I think that those of them without rich daddies would be pretty unhappy to learn that grades can be bought at this institution. I BELIEVE in academic integrity! I have paid my own dues in its service. How can I talk to my own students about intellectual honesty in a philosophical context if I can be bought the way you are suggesting? My policy is mainstream, as you know, and I advertise my policy better than anyone I have ever heard of. This girl took the risk, she got caught, and, I'm sorry, but she's going to pay the price to the extend I have anything to say about it."
The Provost then began an over one-hour long tirade about my character, my motivations, and my unChristlike spirit that was shocking in its depth, thoroughness, and scope.
I went away from that meeting reeling, and called some of my friends from UCSB and from CSUSB. All told me to start looking for a lawyer and that I should investigate grievance procedures on campus, because the Provost was acting completely inappropriately and things were going to get really ugly.
Before I could do any of that, however, the Provost called me into another meeting, this time with the Associate VP for Academic Affairs, who was also the head of the academic standards committee. This gentleman informed me that M.E. had filed an official request to have her "grade expunged from her official transcript," thereby making it appear that she had never even taken the course. The Associate VP wanted me to appear before the academic standards committee to defend my grade and explain why I would not simply change it.
I submitted multiple documents to that committee and appeared before it at least twice. During those proceedings, one member of the committee resigned for two reasons: 1) one of the committee members had helped M.E. draft her petition and yet refused to recuse herself from the proceedings affecting that very petition; 2) the entire mess was purely and entirely the result of the college being in effect extorted by a wealthy father. The person cited how mainstream my policy was, how it had never come into question prior to this incident, and how I was now being cast as the bad guy in what should have been a no-brainer fail.
To no avail, the falsely so-called "academic standards" committee granted M.E.'s request, and expunged my course from her "official" transcript--thus clearly stating the transcripts at WWC are up for bid.
Meanwhile, the Associate Provost and the Provost called me into the Provost's office repeatedly in attempts to cow me into submission on the matter, since it would be "so much cleaner" if I would just change the grade.
As the thing developed, I became more and more determined to not capitulate, as I saw the incident as threatening every foundation of what I have held dear in academia....
|
|
madbolter1
Big Wall climber
Walla Walla, WA
|
|
At the suggestion of my friends, I took the "academic standards" committee, and the Provost to the grievance committee to attempt to undo this damage via internal campus processes.
That committee found that the "academic standards" committee HAD overstepped its authority in expunging my course from M.E.'s transcript, but also found that the Provost had been acting appropriately in his attempts to coerce me into changing the grade (mixed messages if ever I heard them!).
Meanwhile, I heard from a good friend of mine, privy to the inner workings of the President's Cabinet, that the Provost had decided that I had to go and to "watch my back."
This entire process took most of my second year to work through, and near the end of that year, the Chair of the History and Philosophy department called me into his office to tell me that my contract would not be renewed.
I was shocked, since my departmental evaluations were all very positive, and my student evaulation were superb. In fact, many people had stated that I was the most rigorous AND popular philosophy professor the college had ever had.
The Chair then began citing the differences between "analytic" and "continental" (or "historical") philosophy, and stated that the department was really after a more "continental" philosopher.
I replied that the department had CLEARLY known of my (mainstream) analytical philosophical training and background, and that he himself had assured me that my philosophical bent would never be an issue in my retention.
He replied, vaguely, "Well, I have to take everything into consideration and keep the best interests of the department highest in mind."
We talked for a few more minutes, during which time he assured me that I was "a truly great philosophy teacher," but it was clear that the decision had been made.
I was literally minutes from a class, so I went to that class still shaken.
MANY students had been asking me what I would be teaching in the upcoming year, so that they would arrange their schedules to be certain to get at least one of my classes. So, VERY briefly, in one sentence, at the end of each of my classes that day, I said, "I know that a number of you have been planning to arrange your schedules to take in one of my courses next year, but I have just been informed that my contract is not being renewed, so I will not be here next year."
When hands shot up all over the room, I added, "I'm not at liberty to discuss this matter, so I would direct any questions you might have to the Chair of the History and Philsophy department." Then I left.
The Board of Trustees would be meeting in a matter of days, and they would then be ratifying campus hiring and firing decisions. Critical timing on the part of my department!
Within less than two days, students banded together and gathered over 600 signatures on a petition to save my job. Dozens of letters were sent from concerned parents, and the general uproar was such that when the Board met, it overturned the department's decision and placed my position under the Humanities department, with careful instructions about how I was to be evaluated in the upcoming year....
|
|
madbolter1
Big Wall climber
Walla Walla, WA
|
|
The History department was furious at this move, needless to say. They immediately gave vent to their fury in the school newspaper, and started a letter-writing campaign of their own, accusing the Board of "micro-managing," and stating that they well-knew that I had incited the student campaign to save my job and thereby make them look bad.
The department crafted a vociferious letter to the Rank and Tenure committee in which I was accused, among other things, of being a "David Koresh in the making," and that committee was urged to not renew my contract when my three-year advancement came before them for review.
The department needn't have bothered itself, because the Provost was now in a political position to "take the high ground" against such inappropriate Board meddling with internal campus affairs (as though the personnel committee's SOLE job was to ALWAYS simply rubber-stamp departmental decisions). However, this played well to the other faculty on campus. And, because of the sweeping allegations of my own involvement in saving my job, I was advised to remain silent among the faculty and not try to set the record straight. In Werner's terms, I was advised to "let the truth come out." Well, the truth didn't just come out all by it's little self! Instead, even those many faculty who had originally been behind me, decided that I had gone to far in orchastrating my own self-serving campaign and in inciting the Board to "micro-manage" in this "clearly inappropriate" fashion.
Three weeks into my third year, without ANY evaluation of any sort, in "solidarity with the History department," the Humanities committee voted to not renew my contract. Both the timing and the utter lack of evaluation flew in the face of the college handbook and the Board's express instructions concerning my retention. The Humanities committee in effect picked up the fallen gauntlet from the History department and slapped the Board in the face with it. Sensing campus-wide mutiny, this time the Board capitulated and rubber-stamped that decision. I was told repeately by various Board members that they were horrified by the outcome, but that the majority was simply too afraid of the consequences to take a stand on this issue.
Having seen the writing on the wall, I had already retained two attorneys, and I filed suit (as I had repeatedly informed the President, the Provost, the Academic Senate, and some Board members was my intention)....
|
|
madbolter1
Big Wall climber
Walla Walla, WA
|
|
For the record, I had NOTHING to do with the student campaign to save my job. When a couple of students approached me imploring that I give them some guidance about what to do, I said, "I can't tell you anything. This is completely out of my hands at this point, and I will have nothing whatsoever to do with anything you decide to do or not do. As far as I'm concerned, this is a matter for the Board at this point, and, like you, I await their decision."
I finished out my third year at WWC, and then was terminated. During the course of the summer and the ensuing lawsuit, many
points surfaced. Among them:
1) The History department meeting in which my fate was decided was not handled according to policy. One member (who it was well known would have voted FOR me) was not informed of the meeting. Another member, who was up for tenure review himself, was told, "Keep your mouth shut about this--remember that you are up for tenure review yourself." A member of the Humanities committee, not supposed to be a voting member of a "departmental" decision was present, and, guess what?--he was opposed to my retention. And, finally, no vote was ever taken. The chair simply said, "Well, I guess we have a consensus, so I'll call Richard in to inform him of our decision." When the junior faculty member tried to point out that there hadn't even been a VOTE on the subject, he was again reminded of his tenuous position, and he wisely shut up as "suggested." The left-out faculty member was furious to hear of the departmental "vote," but by that time things had moved so quickly beyond that point that the issue was really moot.
2) One member of the department told me that "nefarious forces were at work," and I have since come to know that the Provost actually told the Chair that if my "departure could be arranged," then a "long-promised" additional History faculty position could "also be arranged." This began the heretofor unknown and historically-rewritten "debate" about analytic vs. continental philosophy, and the "department's" decision to replace me with a continental philosopher. (This is a contentious point, so I have a careful document trail denoting the exact dates that various "pro-Richard" and "anti-the-analytic-Richard" documents appear.)
3) Students overwhelmingly voted that I receive the "Teacher of the Year" award in my third year. A friend of mine sat on that committee, so I have a first-hand account of what happened and why I was denied that award. I got three times as many nominations for that award as the other candidates combined (and the award would actually have been helpful in future job searching), but the Provost (Chair of that committee) stated that he would not allow me to have the award because, "Richard undoubtedly crafted these nominations just as he orchastrated his own retention last year, so these are all invalid; and furthermore, we're going to look like idiots firing the teacher of the year the same year he gets the award." So, again, the Provost had his vengeance. (I'm not clear on exactly HOW I was supposed to "watch my back," as warned.)
Next, the lawsuit....
|
|
madbolter1
Big Wall climber
Walla Walla, WA
|
|
My lawyers were brutally honest from the start. They told me, "You've got as strong of a breach of contract and defamation case as we could hope to see, and you have documented everything very well. However, courts are traditionally VERY loath to involve themselves in what they perceive to be 'internal squabbling,' and so universities are really left to themselves when it comes to tenure issues."
However, we prepared our best case, which included more than a dozen clear-cut violations of the college handbook (established by legal precedent as a de-facto contract) committed by the college and submitted it in Superior Court of Walla Walla County. After jerking us around in discovery for months (playing the typical "bleed the opponent" game), suddenly the college's attorneys filed for dismissal, which was almost as immediately granted.
As attorneys in this forum can attest, the bar a court needs to get over to dismiss a case like this is quite high. Basically a "reasonable mind" would have to look at the case and say that it had effectively no merit, a sort of "not even worth a jury's time" evaluation.
At yet more expense, we appealed on the basis that the case obviously had enough merit that the "tryer of fact," namely a jury SHOULD be given the chance to review the facts. However, as predicted, the courts are INDEED loath to involve themselves in what they perceive as "internal squabbling," and the lower court's decision was almost immediately upheld. It was almost as if both courts said, "Hmmm... tenure dispute. Ok, nuff said. Internal squabbling... disgruntled professor (and tenure is wrong anyway)... dismiss."
I will not bore everybody with the details of the case or the legal mumbo-jumbo, but I have several attorney friends who were not involved in the case, and a law student friend, who have all reviewed the court's rulings, and the "consensus" is that an extremely "superficial" job was done by the courts in this case--again, just as my lawyers predicted.
We gave it our best shot, hoping that the college would be held to account and that thereby other junior faculty could have some confidence in their tenuous positions. The case cost my wife and I many tens of thousands of dollars, yet the most carefully documented case just couldn't even get off the ground. The Provost looked me straight in the eye later and told me that the college had treated me perfectly in all respects, and that they would use me as a model of how junior faculty SHOULD be treated. He has since moved on to pastor a large SoCal church, where I expect he is telling his flock exactly how to treat people in "Christlike" fashion.
I have attempted before God to present these facts as accurately straightforwardly as possible. Do with them what you will. I don't intend to debate this issue at all. I'll be happy to answer factual questions, but I'm not going to entertain the sort of "character pot shots" that have been so much a part of the WoS threads. I do in all seriousness, and with depth of feeling, thank Pete for what I think he was trying to accomplish in this thread. However, perhaps this might have been too big a can of worms to digest.
|
|
golsen
Social climber
kennewick, wa
|
|
whew! I am on night shift and reading this gave me something to do. I think that Petes threads got lots of attention because while we may not face the same situation, these things go to the heart of almost everyone.
While I recognize the hurdles that Universities go through to get $, and having graduated from a couple U's, I was still naive to the lack of morality that goes on. Sorry to hear bout your struggle.
I salute you and hope that you are happy with your decision because ultimately, that is what matters.
|
|
madbolter1
Big Wall climber
Walla Walla, WA
|
|
Golsen, yes, actually I am very happy about it. This is one of those things where, you know, you don't feel like a martyr or something like that. I feel really good about it, because I really believe that I did the best I could in the situation. I have actually had various WWC faculty come up to me in local stores over the years and say, "You lost, but you made 'em think. Good job." And stuff like that. And young people I have never met before tell me things like, "I have a friend who had one of your classes. He said it was the best class he had at college. I wish I had had a chance to take one of your classes. But thanks for taking a stand." A guy told me that about a month ago, and I regularly hear stuff like that. So, even now, I think the whole incident had some positive effects, and everybody who was once there making the decisions has retired or moved on. If anything, it's the stand I took that remains from the incident. So, happily, I think I have had a positive effect there, and I do feel good about that.
|
|
TradIsGood
Trad climber
Gunks end of country
|
|
You are the big blind in a cash game of no limit hold 'em. Three players limp and the small blind calls. You hold J 10 of hearts. You flop the nuts, Royal Flush.
Small blind checks to you. What do you do?
|
|
elcapfool
Big Wall climber
hiding in plain sight
|
|
Dang, Jensen,
You should send Mac some money for all the bandwith you chew up.
IMO, you did the right thing.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!