Agreed. However, I absolutely don’t know anyone involved, and I won’t just decide to go cancel some random people for “allegations”. Let more people speak. Let facts surface. Then we can see, but honestly, I’d rather have a court of law decide at that point: this is pretty serious.
Eh… your arguement sound disingenuous here. It is absolutely possible to delineate the court of public opinion from the official court.
They both bear ramifications. They are also both capable of apt judgements, despite their flaws.
Edit. The push back in defense of LMG seems to he 'not enough evidence '. I will argue, again, that the whole point is that evidence comes after discovery.
If i were an employer in LMG’s position, i would be propping up the former employee while also evidencing my lack of guilt. Linus is doing neither.
What argument, precisely? I’m not trying to argue.
Maybe I should clarify what I meant: it doesn’t matter what the public opinion is, if there are legal consequences. The jury’s opinion would eventually matter, if there is a jury, but otherwise, if someone publicly perceived as guilty gets acquitted, then they can’t be judged again for that same crime, no matter how much the public opinion wants it. So it’s not even a question of capability, it’s a question of consequences. And at this point, it’s pretty clear LMG is going to face consequences. In the case of Madison, however, they might be of the legal kind.
Agreed. However, I absolutely don’t know anyone involved, and I won’t just decide to go cancel some random people for “allegations”. Let more people speak. Let facts surface. Then we can see, but honestly, I’d rather have a court of law decide at that point: this is pretty serious.
Eh… your arguement sound disingenuous here. It is absolutely possible to delineate the court of public opinion from the official court.
They both bear ramifications. They are also both capable of apt judgements, despite their flaws.
Edit. The push back in defense of LMG seems to he 'not enough evidence '. I will argue, again, that the whole point is that evidence comes after discovery.
If i were an employer in LMG’s position, i would be propping up the former employee while also evidencing my lack of guilt. Linus is doing neither.
What argument, precisely? I’m not trying to argue.
Maybe I should clarify what I meant: it doesn’t matter what the public opinion is, if there are legal consequences. The jury’s opinion would eventually matter, if there is a jury, but otherwise, if someone publicly perceived as guilty gets acquitted, then they can’t be judged again for that same crime, no matter how much the public opinion wants it. So it’s not even a question of capability, it’s a question of consequences. And at this point, it’s pretty clear LMG is going to face consequences. In the case of Madison, however, they might be of the legal kind.
Oh ok then, that totally excuses the behaviour from linus and lmg. My bad.
How the fuck do you come to that conclusion from what I wrote? Are we even reading the same text?