Quality Is Job 1 Posted October 26, 2017 Share Posted October 26, 2017 18 minutes ago, Billiken Rich said: The theory of communism can only work if everyone is working to the best of there ability regardless of their compensation. In a perfect world that can work. The same perfect world, that never really was, that you would like to get back to. There is no realistic way to raise societal standards short of a religious revival that I am not looking forward to. I'm not talking about the theory of communism. Please don't change the subject. I understand the world isn't perfect, but does that mean we should just let it "go to hell in a handbasket"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quality Is Job 1 Posted October 26, 2017 Share Posted October 26, 2017 1 minute ago, 3star_recruit said: This retrenchment was already attempted by societal leaders in the 1950s. The result was the sexual revolution of the 1960s. I understand I likely can't win this argument, but I still think that our society's permissive attitude regarding "casual sex" just adds fuel to the problem Mr. Pestello is trying to address. If we would stop patting young men on the back for notches on their belt and teach them that there are serious lifelong consequences for sexual activity, maybe many of these problems pervading our culture would (slowly) diminish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quality Is Job 1 Posted October 26, 2017 Share Posted October 26, 2017 18 minutes ago, SShoe said: One could make the argument that if society's standards are overly restrictive, then humans are more likely to rebel and take part in "inappropriate behaviors". Same arguments apply with drugs and alcohol. Anybody watching The Deuce on HBO? As far as I can see, David Simon's basic theory is that the loosening of our laws regarding pornography during the 1970s helped lead to the removal of highly visible street-side prostitution in cities. I think I better make this my last post on the topic, but I think that the "highly visible prostitution" just changed clothes and location. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheeseman Posted October 26, 2017 Share Posted October 26, 2017 1 hour ago, Quality Is Job 1 said: If in our society and culture we would define sexual misconduct as "any sexually-related interaction outside of consensual loving activities between (and only between) the partners of a marriage," then some substantial progress can occur. 31 minutes ago, Billiken Rich said: The theory of communism can only work if everyone is working to the best of there ability regardless of their compensation. In a perfect world that can work. The same perfect world, that never really was, that you would like to get back to. There is no realistic way to raise societal standards short of a religious revival that I am not looking forward to. Just say no - that really works. It actually did not work during the time that people call the "good olde days". Men and women have been having sex out of marriage from the beginning of time and it is not going stop. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnnyJumpUp Posted October 26, 2017 Share Posted October 26, 2017 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moytoy12 Posted October 26, 2017 Share Posted October 26, 2017 1 hour ago, Westy03 said: Either that or hes getting ready to drop the hammer That was my takeaway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davidnark Posted October 26, 2017 Share Posted October 26, 2017 2 hours ago, Quality Is Job 1 said: If in our society and culture we would define sexual misconduct as "any sexually-related interaction outside of consensual loving activities between (and only between) the partners of a marriage," then some substantial progress can occur. ??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davidnark Posted October 26, 2017 Share Posted October 26, 2017 The cup half full part of me is optimistic that this was released as part of a settlement that doesn’t discipline specific individuals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SouthSide_Billiken Posted October 26, 2017 Share Posted October 26, 2017 (edited) First off, hello. I've been following the board for a while, and have finally decided to jump in. Now, on to the topic at hand. The part of Pestello's letter that stood out to me was the following: "...behavior behind the reports of sexual misconduct..." The statement could have simply said "sexual misconduct" or "allegations of sexual misconduct." They could have even used the term "sexual assault." However, they were seemingly very careful not to do so. To me, this looks like a statement very carefully crafted by lawyers (perhaps even the outside Title IX firm, Cozen O’Connor). I may be way off base, but I took this email as good news. I read it to be the University saying that we aren't going to punish anybody for the alleged September 26 incident. However, we are aware that we have a problem, and don't take sexual assault allegations lightly. Edited October 26, 2017 by SouthSide_Billiken billikenfan05, Spoon-Balls, JMM28 and 1 other like this Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billikenfan05 Posted October 26, 2017 Share Posted October 26, 2017 1 hour ago, SouthSide_Billiken said: First off, hello. I've been following the board for a while, and have finally decided to jump in. Now, on to the topic at hand. The part of Pestello's letter that stood out to me was the following: "...behavior behind the reports of sexual misconduct..." The statement could have simply said "sexual misconduct" or "allegations of sexual misconduct." They could have even used the term "sexual assault." However, they were seemingly very careful not to do so. To me, this looks like a statement very carefully crafted by lawyers (perhaps even the outside Title IX firm, Cozen O’Connor). I may be way off base, but I took this email as good news. I read it to be the University saying that we aren't going to punish anybody for the alleged September 26 incident. However, we are aware that we have a problem, and don't take sexual assault allegations lightly. That’s how you do a first post on a message board. Well done and welcome Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billiken Rich Posted October 27, 2017 Share Posted October 27, 2017 2 hours ago, SouthSide_Billiken said: First off, hello. I've been following the board for a while, and have finally decided to jump in. Now, on to the topic at hand. The part of Pestello's letter that stood out to me was the following: "...behavior behind the reports of sexual misconduct..." The statement could have simply said "sexual misconduct" or "allegations of sexual misconduct." They could have even used the term "sexual assault." However, they were seemingly very careful not to do so. To me, this looks like a statement very carefully crafted by lawyers (perhaps even the outside Title IX firm, Cozen O’Connor). I may be way off base, but I took this email as good news. I read it to be the University saying that we aren't going to punish anybody for the alleged September 26 incident. However, we are aware that we have a problem, and don't take sexual assault allegations lightly. Its an honor to have you on the board Mr Rosenblum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
almaman Posted October 27, 2017 Share Posted October 27, 2017 yes and thanks for all you've done for the program Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SouthSide_Billiken Posted October 27, 2017 Share Posted October 27, 2017 Just now, Billiken Rich said: Its an honor to have you on the board Mr Rosenblum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VeniceMenace Posted October 27, 2017 Share Posted October 27, 2017 Feel much better seeing the president's email vs. absolutely nothing before Situation 1 verdict. Wonder what Dr. B thinks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cowboy Posted October 30, 2017 Share Posted October 30, 2017 -so, do we hear something this week? I would hope either this week or next and further hope that the U is busting its butt to get this resolved quickly and fairly for all involved Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old guy Posted October 30, 2017 Share Posted October 30, 2017 Cowboy, the U is doing very little at this time, they farmed out the processing of the Title IX event and must wait until the law firm they farmed out the processing to comes back with results and recommendations (which the U will probably have to follow). For the time being no news is good news. As long as the processing is going on nothing will be done. You may get some "image" pieces from the University in the interval, but these are nothing much other than PR, attempts to project a good image to the public. They are doing well in that regard, by the way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westy03 Posted October 30, 2017 Share Posted October 30, 2017 Thought it was interesting that there are no players on the tickets this year. Could mean something could mean nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kshoe Posted October 30, 2017 Share Posted October 30, 2017 2 minutes ago, Westy03 said: Thought it was interesting that there are no players on the tickets this year. Could mean something could mean nothing. I'd think it was intentional, but the tickets had to be printed 4-6 weeks ago when there was more uncertainty, closed practices, etc. If I was one of the players involved I'd really want clarity on what is happening before the season starts. Maybe they already have it. Playing a game or two and then having the book thrown at them is a bad way to waste a year of eligibility. I have to believe that the powers that be at SLU fully understand this timeline. FWIW, playing in an exhibition game does not matter for eligibility so I wouldn't take anything as done just because all players play, if all players play. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bauman Posted October 30, 2017 Share Posted October 30, 2017 42 minutes ago, kshoe said: I'd think it was intentional, but the tickets had to be printed 4-6 weeks ago when there was more uncertainty, closed practices, etc. If I was one of the players involved I'd really want clarity on what is happening before the season starts. Maybe they already have it. Playing a game or two and then having the book thrown at them is a bad way to waste a year of eligibility. I have to believe that the powers that be at SLU fully understand this timeline. FWIW, playing in an exhibition game does not matter for eligibility so I wouldn't take anything as done just because all players play, if all players play. Just a question that I do not know the answer to; If playing in an exhibition game has no impact on eligibility then why have we not played transfers such as Bess, Foreman and AD in those games. Also, I am pretty sure we will not see Santos in the game this weekend. I wonder if Santos and Graves played in the "game" with Ill. St.? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brianstl Posted October 30, 2017 Share Posted October 30, 2017 5 minutes ago, bauman said: Just a question that I do not know the answer to; If playing in an exhibition game has no impact on eligibility then why have we not played transfers such as Bess, Foreman and AD in those games. Also, I am pretty sure we will not see Santos in the game this weekend. I wonder if Santos and Graves played in the "game" with Ill. St.? Why would you play players that can't play during the regular season in a game meant to help prepare you for the regular season? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brianstl Posted October 30, 2017 Share Posted October 30, 2017 11 minutes ago, bauman said: Just a question that I do not know the answer to; If playing in an exhibition game has no impact on eligibility then why have we not played transfers such as Bess, Foreman and AD in those games. Also, I am pretty sure we will not see Santos in the game this weekend. I wonder if Santos and Graves played in the "game" with Ill. St.? To answer your question redshirt transfers can not travel with the team and can not dress for any game. Only freshman are allowed to play in exhibition games and to still redshirt. All others technically burn a year of eligibility by playing in an exhibition game. Tim Abromaitas at Notre Dame was an example a few years back. He ended up getting a year of eligibility back because Brey supposedly didn't know the rules, but did have to serve a 4 game suspension. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kshoe Posted October 30, 2017 Share Posted October 30, 2017 7 minutes ago, brianstl said: To answer your question redshirt transfers can not travel with the team and can not dress for any game. Only freshman are allowed to play in exhibition games and to still redshirt. All others technically burn a year of eligibility by playing in an exhibition game. Tim Abromaitas at Notre Dame was an example a few years back. He ended up getting a year of eligibility back because Brey supposedly didn't know the rules, but did have to serve a 4 game suspension. I did not know this. Interesting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billikid Posted November 1, 2017 Share Posted November 1, 2017 Just FYI, the university just sent another campus wide email. I doubt there is any reason to read in to it but this thread has included these emails before so I thought it may be worth sharing. It says students are required to complete another sexual misconduct training module before the end of the calendar year. I say another because everyone had to do it coming in as a freshman. Also, it isn't from the president but from the equity office. "All students are required to complete the online module which will take approximately 30 minutes. Due to changes in the Sexual Misconduct Policy, the importance of this topic, and federal requirements, students that completed the educational module in previous years are still required to complete this updated module." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RiseAndGrind Posted November 1, 2017 Share Posted November 1, 2017 25 minutes ago, Billikid said: Just FYI, the university just sent another campus wide email. I doubt there is any reason to read in to it but this thread has included these emails before so I thought it may be worth sharing. It says students are required to complete another sexual misconduct training module before the end of the calendar year. I say another because everyone had to do it coming in as a freshman. Also, it isn't from the president but from the equity office. "All students are required to complete the online module which will take approximately 30 minutes. Due to changes in the Sexual Misconduct Policy, the importance of this topic, and federal requirements, students that completed the educational module in previous years are still required to complete this updated module." Pure speculation on my part but this sounds like it came from the title 9 lawyers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shempie Posted November 1, 2017 Share Posted November 1, 2017 On 10/30/2017 at 12:22 PM, Westy03 said: Thought it was interesting that there are no players on the tickets this year. Could mean something could mean nothing. There aren't game pictures in SLU uniforms for most of these guys. I assumed that was why no pics on the tickets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts