Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Man in the Funny Hat" data-source="post: 2749771" data-attributes="member: 32740">That doesn't really follow.&nbsp; But because he DID offer it freely and openly as information about himself in a questionairre whose PURPOSE is to find the best (or at least better) candidate to fill an empty player seat then he obviously (?) accepts that it might be used against him.&nbsp; No?&nbsp; Nobody has to honest - but being honest doesn't give you a free pass or relieve you of the consequences of your honesty.It's not high and mighty - it's choosing one over the other, it's weighing positives and negatives.&nbsp; If you have two applicants, both equally appealing but one is an admitted ex-con you surely wouldn't assume that because the ex-con is being honest about his past that he should then be the PREFERRED candidate.If, as you say, the ex-con is possibly - heck, let's say he's even LIKELY to have reformed and this is indicated by his honesty then is he not going to be sanguine to a certain extent that his past mistakes are likely to haunt him in just this sort of way for a long time?&nbsp; His past, whether he admits it or not, places in question his character and responsibility in HIGHLY significant social areas.&nbsp; If he admits it and it is used against him - that is the price he will continue to pay.&nbsp; If he keeps it secret and it comes out later - then a price will perhaps be paid for his lack of honesty in addition to WELL-FOUNDED apprehensions about his responsibility and character.In closing, I'd like to state that the only thing I can really fault the originally posted listing for is attitude/tone, not the underlying purpose or content.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Man in the Funny Hat, post: 2749771, member: 32740"] That doesn't really follow. But because he DID offer it freely and openly as information about himself in a questionairre whose PURPOSE is to find the best (or at least better) candidate to fill an empty player seat then he obviously (?) accepts that it might be used against him. No? Nobody has to honest - but being honest doesn't give you a free pass or relieve you of the consequences of your honesty. It's not high and mighty - it's choosing one over the other, it's weighing positives and negatives. If you have two applicants, both equally appealing but one is an admitted ex-con you surely wouldn't assume that because the ex-con is being honest about his past that he should then be the PREFERRED candidate. If, as you say, the ex-con is possibly - heck, let's say he's even LIKELY to have reformed and this is indicated by his honesty then is he not going to be sanguine to a certain extent that his past mistakes are likely to haunt him in just this sort of way for a long time? His past, whether he admits it or not, places in question his character and responsibility in HIGHLY significant social areas. If he admits it and it is used against him - that is the price he will continue to pay. If he keeps it secret and it comes out later - then a price will perhaps be paid for his lack of honesty in addition to WELL-FOUNDED apprehensions about his responsibility and character. In closing, I'd like to state that the only thing I can really fault the originally posted listing for is attitude/tone, not the underlying purpose or content. [/QUOTE]

Verification