Do you say this with any accusation made against predators or just right now because he's a prominent dev?
This forum has no moral standpoint in taking the high ground on a child pornography accusation.
Continuous blind-eye turning towards concerning posts and the defense of "ephebophilic" tendencies of some users, actually.
Continuous blind-eye turning towards concerning posts and the defense of "ephebophilic" tendencies of some users, actually.
You should take this with a grain (more like mound) of salt because the one making accusations is beeing sued for fraud by gearbox and this is his line of defense.This question seems a little loaded. Do you bring this point up anytime someone mentions waiting for evidence or only when people have preconceived opinions about the accused?
I would hope this applies to every situation, but regardless, it is still a good suggestion to wait for further evidence before immediately believing every accusation. We shouldn't assume accusations are immediately true just because he is a prominent dev either.
This forum has no moral standpoint in taking the high ground on a child pornography accusation.
I say it because the lawyer himself is being sued for misuse of company credit cards and this accusation is out of left field. I couldn't give a fuck if he was a prominent developer or not.
I tend to take any accusation of sexual misconduct seriously regardless of who is being accused, yes.
Continuous blind-eye turning towards concerning posts and the defense of "ephebophilic" tendencies of some users, actually.
What do you mean, he can make those claims with no repercussions whatsoever?
My understanding is that that wouldn't necessarily apply if a person knowingly makes a false statement.
Oh fuck right off. Because one of the mods at the old site was a pedo everyone here is too?
Care to elaborate?
That means provide examples in this case.
My opinion on that is that he didn't need to put that stuff in there with the other stuff unless it was true.
No, he can't. But libel is much harder to claim in the US than the UK.What do you mean, he can make those claims with no repercussions whatsoever?
Actually if it turns out that the lawyer is the one trying to pull a stunt with his lawsuit, considering he himself is being accused in a different lawsuit, then I don't see why his accusation should hold any sort of water against Randy.Well guilty or not he'll never shake that stink of a kiddy porn accusation.
What do you mean, he can make those claims with no repercussions whatsoever?
Actually if it turns out that the lawyer is the one trying to pull a stunt with his lawsuit, considering he himself is being accused in a different lawsuit, then I don't see why his accusation should hold any sort of water against Randy.
The allegation alone can destroy lives be there proof or not. If it's baseless then I hope they sue the guy into oblivion.Yeah... What in the actual fuck?
Better have proof on this, because that's a very serious allegation.
Actually if it turns out that the lawyer is the one trying to pull a stunt with his lawsuit, considering he himself is being accused in a different lawsuit, then I don't see why his accusation should hold any sort of water against Randy.
My opinion on that is that he didn't need to put that stuff in there with the other stuff unless it was true.
The parties bit is as wild as the pizzagate partiesI really hope those accusations aren't true. Makes me feel sick to my core that such 'parties' could take place.
Well, this thread confirms people dislike Randy in general and thus would be more prone to judge him guilty of said accusations without evidence. I don't have much of an opinion regarding Randy, but this Callender dude seems to be trying to pull a stunt, IMO, as a way to deflect attention from the severe accusations against himself.He's guilty already - at least in the court of public opinion. This thread kind of confirms it.
Isn't Randy already disliked in ResetEra though?Oh I'm not saying it's right, but look at this thread already. The public has already made up their minds and you're not going to change it with "facts".
I mean they definitely do, but maybe not in this caseI really hope those accusations aren't true. Makes me feel sick to my core that such 'parties' could take place.
Cool, I'm glad your opinion equates to fact and that evidence of the matter is simply not needed. Court of public opinion is always the dumbest court involved.
My opinion on that is that he didn't need to put that stuff in there with the other stuff unless it was true.
You realise that for the past two years accusing someone of beeing a pedo is all the rage right? From Clinton to Gunn to anyone you have a beef with.If there is evidence it will either come to light in court or not. For now there is nothing stopping myself or anyone else from taking the accusation very seriously especially when this sort of thing is not at all uncommon.
He's not legally covered if he's making these statements knowing that they're false. IF.Can you explain why this lawyer is likely legally covered even if they claim they knew about these things before? I'm pretty sure I know why but I'm not a lawyer.
That's been a thing for a long timeYou realise that for the past two years accusing someone of beeing a pedo is all the rage right? From Clinton to Gunn to anyone you have a beef with.
They instantly change the discourse
By using « hearsay » he covers himself since it will be very hard to prove he lied (if he did obviously)He's not legally covered if he's making these statements knowing that they're false. IF.
If there is evidence it will either come to light in court or not. For now there is nothing stopping myself or anyone else from taking the accusation very seriously especially when this sort of thing is not at all uncommon.
If there is evidence it will either come to light in court or not. For now there is nothing stopping myself or anyone else from taking the accusation very seriously especially when this sort of thing is not at all uncommon.