[quote="kidcoyote, post:540, topic:1733"]Criticizing the film without seeing it? Contempt prior to investigation.[/quote]
Not to pick nits, but that is a play right out of your playbook.
Got a single example?
Clearly your hubris is much greater than your memory.
Go back and read your posts in the Sandusky thread. You sure as hell criticized and denigrated Spanier based on a paper he researched and coauthored. A paper which you admitted yo only reading two pages. Not only that, you continuously claimed to know what Spanier's personal opinion was on the matter from reading only two pages and despite the fact that research papers are not forums for personal opinion. They are to present the results of the research.
Go back and read any number of your threads and you will see a similar pattern.
Au contraire. Did Spanier not say regarding mate swapping, "deviance is in the eye of the beholder?" I believe in natural law. That violates it, end of story. You hid behind that he didn't necessarily support it. I say BS. No one writes a thesis on mate swapping, says what he said, and does not support it or at least condone it. Come on Tim, that statement alone gives support to mate swapping, implicitly. I'm not saying you should be imprisoned or put to death, but a president of a university condoning or even suggesting this behavior is okay, that it depends on the beholder? NFW it does. The 10 Commandments are a low bar, not a high one. How many married guys here would be okay for mate swapping? Come on Tim. Deviant, Tim, not dependent on the beholder. A crime? No, but that's not the point. I'm not surprised Spanier handled the JS affair in the manner he did. He didn't know better. No foundation. No basis for making the right call. Maybe JS' behavior wasn't deviant, or not seriously punishable? Maybe it's in the eyes of the beholder?
Look at how Larry Arnn handled the scandal at Hillsdale, a private school not bailed out by a state. They could have easily failed, as PSU might've, not given state support. Hillsdale no longer accepts state support, and never has taken Federal loans. Compare his handling of it to Spanier's in the JS incident. The former addressed it, the latter didn't. But Arnn has a moral foundation he could rely on, Spanier didn't. Look at the emails. What more evidence do you need? There was a child involved, Tim. Come on. Spanier incapable of making the right calls. Oh, he'll say the right things on global warming, feminism, tolerance, but when faced with the JS situation, he wilted. And I'd say on the Mann investigation, he also wilted, not even having Mann answer 2 of 4 questions put forward, just ignoring them, then clearing Mann. There are PSU engineering alumnae who complained about this whitewash, at the time, writing letters to the paper. Any honest observer would agree it was a whitewash. Seriously, of 4 questions to be considered re Mann, Spanier dropped 2 entirely. These questions were put forward by scientists like Richard Lindzen, and Spanier thought them unimportant, so he skipped them, clearing Mann. Sort of like he handled the JS affair, no? Ignoring it?
It doesn't state it here, but upon hiring, Arnn forbade sexual relations between(or among) staff, unless of course, married, and instituted an honor code, which can be seen by hitting the link. And Spanier after JS?