Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

What the Fark???

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Re: What the Fark???

    Surprised this little twerp hasn't gotten any play on here yet. Really tempted to put this in the genuinely nice planet thread, since its definitely a case of someone getting her just desevrings. (did I spell that correctly?)
    If you don't change the world today, how can it be any better tomorrow?

    Comment


    • Re: What the Fark???

      Originally posted by LynahFan View Post
      Surprised this little twerp hasn't gotten any play on here yet. Really tempted to put this in the genuinely nice planet thread, since its definitely a case of someone getting her just desevrings. (did I spell that correctly?)
      Spelled correctly, and hilarious. That bi*ch won't make it in the real world. Actually feel sorry for the parents
      Never really developed a taste for tequila. Kind of hard to understand how you make a drink out of something that sharp, inhospitable. Now, bourbon is easy to understand.
      Tastes like a warm summer day. -Raylan Givens

      Comment


      • Re: What the Fark???

        Originally posted by LynahFan View Post
        Surprised this little twerp hasn't gotten any play on here yet. Really tempted to put this in the genuinely nice planet thread, since its definitely a case of someone getting her just desevrings. (did I spell that correctly?)
        I wonder what would have happened if the father had said that he told his daughter about the settlement before he actually signed the settlement agreement, or even verbally agreed to it? That is, once the school made him an offer that was acceptable, he goes to his daughter and tells her he's going to accept their offer of "X". I don't think anything he did before the actual final settlement could be construed as a breach of that confidentiality language.
        That community is already in the process of dissolution where each man begins to eye his neighbor as a possible enemy, where non-conformity with the accepted creed, political as well as religious, is a mark of disaffection; where denunciation, without specification or backing, takes the place of evidence; where orthodoxy chokes freedom of dissent; where faith in the eventual supremacy of reason has become so timid that we dare not enter our convictions in the open lists, to win or lose.

        Comment


        • Re: What the Fark???

          Originally posted by SJHovey View Post
          I wonder what would have happened if the father had said that he told his daughter about the settlement before he actually signed the settlement agreement, or even verbally agreed to it? That is, once the school made him an offer that was acceptable, he goes to his daughter and tells her he's going to accept their offer of "X". I don't think anything he did before the actual final settlement could be construed as a breach of that confidentiality language.
          Doubt that any reasonably skilled negotiator would let that happen. There would have been no opportunity for the father to discuss the settlement between the time the offer was made and the agreement was signed and/or the confidentiality agreement would also have covered the negotiations. Otherwise confidentiality agreements would be worthless. Your hypothetical would really be no different than the father getting the settlement offer, publicizing it directly, then signing the confidentiality agreement, and no negotiator would let that happen.

          Comment


          • Re: What the Fark???

            Originally posted by CLS View Post
            Doubt that any reasonably skilled negotiator would let that happen. There would have been no opportunity for the father to discuss the settlement between the time the offer was made and the agreement was signed and/or the confidentiality agreement would also have covered the negotiations. Otherwise confidentiality agreements would be worthless. Your hypothetical would really be no different than the father getting the settlement offer, publicizing it directly, then signing the confidentiality agreement, and no negotiator would let that happen.
            I don't know that the negotiator has any control over it, at least until the settlement was agreed to.

            Lawsuits are typically public. If a negotiator for the school says, "we'll agree to pay you "x" to settle this case, but only if you keep it confidential", there is nothing that keeps the father from publicizing that, other than knowing the school will withdraw it's offer.
            That community is already in the process of dissolution where each man begins to eye his neighbor as a possible enemy, where non-conformity with the accepted creed, political as well as religious, is a mark of disaffection; where denunciation, without specification or backing, takes the place of evidence; where orthodoxy chokes freedom of dissent; where faith in the eventual supremacy of reason has become so timid that we dare not enter our convictions in the open lists, to win or lose.

            Comment


            • Re: What the Fark???

              Originally posted by SJHovey View Post
              I don't know that the negotiator has any control over it, at least until the settlement was agreed to.

              Lawsuits are typically public. If a negotiator for the school says, "we'll agree to pay you "x" to settle this case, but only if you keep it confidential", there is nothing that keeps the father from publicizing that, other than knowing the school will withdraw it's offer.
              The part of a lawsuit that gets to court is public. Settlement negotiations are not.

              The negotiator for the school would be more likely to say, "We'll agree to pay you $$ to settle this case, but only if you keep all aspects of this negotiation, including any offers we make, confidential." Lawsuits are settled all the time with confidentiality agreements. If it were as easy as you say to publicize the negotiations, settlements would never happen.

              Comment


              • Re: What the Fark???

                Originally posted by CLS View Post
                The part of a lawsuit that gets to court is public. Settlement negotiations are not.

                The negotiator for the school would be more likely to say, "We'll agree to pay you $$ to settle this case, but only if you keep all aspects of this negotiation, including any offers we make, confidential." Lawsuits are settled all the time with confidentiality agreements. If it were as easy as you say to publicize the negotiations, settlements would never happen.
                According to the actual decision, it was the release and settlement agreement that contained the confidentiality clause. That clause prohibited the father from disclosing any terms whatsoever regarding the existence or terms of the Agreement (referring specifically to the release and settlement agreement). That's what he was accused of violating, the actual agreement that he signed. Until he signed it, he wasn't bound by it.
                That community is already in the process of dissolution where each man begins to eye his neighbor as a possible enemy, where non-conformity with the accepted creed, political as well as religious, is a mark of disaffection; where denunciation, without specification or backing, takes the place of evidence; where orthodoxy chokes freedom of dissent; where faith in the eventual supremacy of reason has become so timid that we dare not enter our convictions in the open lists, to win or lose.

                Comment


                • Re: What the Fark???

                  Originally posted by SJHovey View Post
                  According to the actual decision, it was the release and settlement agreement that contained the confidentiality clause. That clause prohibited the father from disclosing any terms whatsoever regarding the existence or terms of the Agreement (referring specifically to the release and settlement agreement). That's what he was accused of violating, the actual agreement that he signed. Until he signed it, he wasn't bound by it.
                  Don’t disagree with anything here, except it would be very surprising if the offer itself was not contingent on confidentiality. In that case, if confidentiality were compromised, the result would be that the offer would be withdrawn and the father would not have gotten any money, the daughter wouldn’t have had her trip paid for, and we’d probably never have heard about it. So that’s the probable answer to your initial question. In this case, he did sign the agreement, so the remedy is that he has to give the money back, as opposed to never having gotten it in the first place.

                  Comment


                  • Re: What the Fark???

                    I rather suspect that parties who are involved in this type of negotiation would sign confidentiality agreements as they ENTER the negotiations, in addition to whatever confidentiality agreement is part of the final settlement. Don't have any facts to back that up, but it would make sense to me.
                    If you don't change the world today, how can it be any better tomorrow?

                    Comment


                    • Re: What the Fark???

                      https://www.bostonglobe.com/2014/03/...QXN/story.html

                      The headline is misleading. It would be far more accurate if it read “Shooting photos up a woman’s skirt is not illegal in Mass., SJC rules.” As it’s written, it’s implied that it’s appropriate behavior, and I’d doubt you’d find any non-pervert to agree that it is.

                      http://www.boston.com/news/local/mas...jdK/story.html

                      Edit: non-subscription link. Headline in bostonglobe.com article read "Shooting photos up a woman's skirt is legal in Mass., SJC [Mass Supreme Judicial Court] rules."
                      Last edited by CLS; 03-05-2014, 04:29 PM.

                      Comment


                      • Re: What the Fark???

                        Originally posted by CLS View Post
                        https://www.bostonglobe.com/2014/03/...QXN/story.html

                        The headline is misleading. It would be far more accurate if it read “Shooting photos up a woman’s skirt is not illegal in Mass., SJC rules.” As it’s written, it’s implied that it’s appropriate behavior, and I’d doubt you’d find any non-pervert to agree that it is.

                        http://www.boston.com/news/local/mas...jdK/story.html

                        Edit: non-subscription link. Headline in bostonglobe.com article read "Shooting photos up a woman's skirt is legal in Mass., SJC [Mass Supreme Judicial Court] rules."
                        Look... her... face could launch a thousand chips!
                        She's ...up ...dressing, she's be down in a jiffy.

                        Comment


                        • Re: What the Fark???

                          "Nothing to see here .... Move along ....

                          Dam's 65ft long 2 inch wide crack "seals itself"
                          Last edited by MadTownSioux; 03-06-2014, 05:01 PM.
                          Fighting Sioux Forever

                          Comment


                          • Re: What the Fark???

                            I'm listening to KQRS 92.5 (Twin Cities) on IHeart Radio. Some guy called in to request 'We didn't start the Fire' by Billy Joel, and prefaced it by asking if the Government had instructed radio stations not to play this song because of the current events in Crimea. What??
                            Fighting Sioux Forever

                            Comment


                            • Re: What the Fark???

                              Originally posted by MadTownSioux View Post
                              I'm listening to KQRS 92.5 (Twin Cities) on IHeart Radio. Some guy called in to request 'We didn't start the Fire' by Billy Joel, and prefaced it by asking if the Government had instructed radio stations not to play this song because of the current events in Crimea. What??
                              The caller was FlagDUDE08, I'm sure.
                              "The party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command." George Orwell, 1984

                              "One does not simply walk into Mordor. Its Black Gates are guarded by more than just Orcs. There is evil there that does not sleep, and the Great Eye is ever watchful. It is a barren wasteland, riddled with fire and ash and dust, the very air you breathe is a poisonous fume." Boromir

                              "Good news! We have a delivery." Professor Farnsworth

                              Comment


                              • Re: What the Fark???

                                Originally posted by MadTownSioux View Post
                                I'm listening to KQRS 92.5 (Twin Cities) on IHeart Radio. Some guy called in to request 'We didn't start the Fire' by Billy Joel, and prefaced it by asking if the Government had instructed radio stations not to play this song because of the current events in Crimea. What??
                                KQ is on iheartradio now? Is the morning show broadcast there? I have tried to find a stream of the KQ morning show in the past, and it seems to blocked or something.
                                Having a clear conscience just means you have a bad memory or you had a boring weekend.

                                RIP - Kirby

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X