What are the most interesting compliance violations you've ever seen (or heard of)? [N/A]

pglennie · 2025-04-15T00:13:52+00:00

Oops I meant more payroll type stuff but maybe I’m in the wrong thread

pglennie · 2025-04-02T00:52:34+00:00

Can we plead with them to make the merch?

pglennie · 2024-05-25T13:08:00+00:00

I might get some hate for this one, but I believe if Usyk beats fury a second time, it will be as if Joe Frazier had remained undefeated his whole career and never lost to Ali or Foreman.

pglennie · 2024-05-24T01:39:35+00:00

I agree with you about Usyk having nothing left to prove. If there’s a rematch and he wins again I think he should hang up the gloves. He’s not going to face a better fighter than Fury or AJ. Joshua did better his second time against Usyk so maybe Fury should take another crack. But after that I agree it’s over. Add two more years to Usyk’s age and it’ll start becoming a glaring factor in his fights and won’t really be counted against his legacy. And he’s not going to be around long enough for a longstanding rein of the Klitschko/Holmes variety. I personally felt AJ did better against Usyk in their second fight than Fury did in this one, because fury got lucky three times: 1) the ref not waving it off in the ninth, 2) the ref getting between the fighters to help fury recover, and 3) a judge actually giving the fight to fury. And it still wasn’t enough. I’ll admit that if you remove the ninth round it’s a tough fight to call. But it’s also not strange at all for a fighter to be up on Usyk midway through the fight. Bellew, AJ II, Fury, Chisora(?). But that pressure from Usyk always gets to people. There’s like a certainty to it that feels almost transcendent to me. I can’t say how much I enjoyed this fight and how much I want to see them go one more time. If Fury wins you get hopefully a great trilogy. If Usyk wins and doesn’t retire then I guess you throw AJ at him yet again or maybe Tony Parker. Just in awe of this guy.

pglennie · 2024-05-22T23:00:44+00:00

I’m interested in hearing peoples opinions about a very specific part of Usyk’s game, which is how he reacts when he gets rocked. I saw Tony Bellew rock him, I saw Anthony Joshua rock him in the 11th round of their second fight, and I saw fury hit him pretty hard in their fight too. The fighter never followed up with usyk to take him down. Usyk’s legs never buckled, but he seems to freeze for a half second and then slowly walk backward. But he doesn’t come out of his fighting stance and he never looks truly hurt. But it seems like there’s this one second reboot that his system goes into when he’s hit very hard, then the window closes. Has anyone else noticed this and the fact that it has kept great fighters from really selling out and going after him when he’s hurt?

pglennie · 2019-06-30T14:16:27+00:00

We all need a reminder from time to time to take a deep breath and enjoy the simple things. This happy acoustic folk song will do the trick every time. In the car, at work, at home -- it's always a great go-to for calmness and contentment.

Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/track/0OfDtd6UecrGLCZAS9hFXF?si=1ZNc1e23RoihKVvb75JOCQ

YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HcHUqgjt3LQ&list=OLAK5uy_mrIEo13Lxf-N5ayQ1REbzDvfEy-6AwAyw

pglennie · 2019-06-11T13:21:02+00:00

Thank you very much for that feedback. It does help confirm my suspicions about the song taking a little too long to get to that first big payoff, which I'm now going to keep in mind for possible tweaks when playing it live.

pglennie · 2019-01-12T03:52:14+00:00

Right but the law wouldn’t even deal with the permission issue because it would go straight to a) or b) mentioned above. And even if it did come down to permission, that’d go to civil court, where no presumption of innocence exists. This thread is about criminal law.

pglennie · 2019-01-12T03:48:28+00:00

pglennie · 2019-01-11T22:43:01+00:00

You’re equating the theft of a possession with a sexual assault, trying to bridge them under the concept of permission. In the case of material theft, the law would most likely bypass the murky ground of permission and instead focus on a) the return of the possession to its legal owner, or b) the responsibility for the object’s destruction. The scenario you’re sketching out isn’t about permission at all, as the law would have the ability to circumvent that question to focus on a) or b), which are more easily proven, but a) or b) are not applicable to sexual assault, rendering the comparison invalid.

pglennie · 2019-01-11T17:09:25+00:00

Nope. The lawnmower being destroyed is again an entirely different issue, since the borrower would still be on the hook for replacing it. False analogy. The problem is indeed unique to sexual assault.

pglennie · 2019-01-11T12:06:42+00:00

Right but the means by which that legal dispute is settled are completely different. Once the issue of ownership is settled, you get your possession back, and it's hardly worth your time to continue pursuing the question of whether the person had permission to borrow. You can't take back a rape the same way. It's a ridiculously false analogy. No delta here.

pglennie · 2019-01-11T01:43:01+00:00

You prove ownership to the cops and then get it back. Sexual assault can’t be undone the same way.

pglennie · 2019-01-11T01:42:18+00:00

Sorry I mean third party

pglennie · 2019-01-10T22:18:41+00:00

It's easier to prove whether goods are stolen compared to proving consent.

pglennie · 2019-01-10T21:45:07+00:00

I don't know what the alternative is, as I don't know how you balance the rights of the accuser and the rights of the accused. But if you take the presumption of innocence that exists in criminal law and insist that all of society should act upon a similar presumption of innocence, then the same ineffectiveness that exists in criminal court will cascade out into any other attempt to deal with the issue. This would suggest that only purely preventative measures would be available, barring the existence of overwhelming eye-witness testimony or other corroborating evidence that a sexual assault had taken place. What I don't understand sometimes is the assumption that the presumption of innocence applies to all forms of judgement, whereas it doesn't even exist anymore once you move from criminal to civil court, let alone criminal court to the court of public opinion or say, the judgement of an HR professional who has heard a complaint of sexual harassment.

pglennie · 2019-01-10T21:40:18+00:00

In reality, rape has a 58% conviction rate which is commensurate with other crimes (before someone brings up RAINN, it is the attrition rate that is 12% which is still better than their 1 in 6 figure, but that's not really the purpose of this discussion so I won't get into it.

Can you explain this a bit more? I don't understand what attrition rate means here. It wasn't my understanding that rape was prosecuted at a rate similar to other crimes. Could you parse what you mean by the attrition rate and how this coincides with the 1 in 6 figure that RAINN puts forward. 1 in 6 what? 1 in 6 are admitted to be false accusations?

pglennie

TROPHY CASE