|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Steelrails
Joined: 12 Mar 2009
Location: Earth, Solar System
|
 Posted: Mon Sep 26, 2011 7:00 am Post subject: |
 |
|
Steelrails, you and TUM are usually pretty good in your posts but discrimination is a violation of certain laws. The OP can't just walk to the police and claim it. There has to be real evidence not someone's word alone.
[/quote]
True, but at the same time if it quacks like a duck...
Maybe discrimination can't be proven in a court of law, but in the court of customer service... |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
mayorgc
Joined: 19 Oct 2008
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 26, 2011 7:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| No, evidence is what supports the testimony or knocks it down. |
Testimony is a form of evidence.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/testimonies
| Quote: |
| No, I am operating under the premise that the OP leaped to a conclusion and cannot prove his assertion/accusation. He may think it was discrimination but it may not be. |
But even without the smoking gun, based on what was presented, it could be discrimination.
| Quote: |
| No I explained this once before. Just because the OP is telling the truth doesn't make it discrimination. he is only going by what he thinks is evidence and may not be. When he came back later did he know if the children playing were relatives, grandchildren, children? Friends of the shopkeeper? No he assumed something and went from there. Rules are different for family and friends |
If the shopkeeper is operating under a different rule set, that's called discrimination......
| Quote: |
| Quote: |
| Is it libel if it's the truth? |
In Korea it can be |
Well, there's nothing wrong with libel in the Korean sense. In Korea, telling the truth can get you in trouble with the law. The shop keeper won't be harmed, only the OP. So you don't need to worry about it, the shop keeper won't feel it at all.
| Quote: |
| Quote: |
| you read that OJs son might have been behind the murders. Yeah, that's pretty much hearsay. |
No, it was speculation and a possibility. Not hearsay. They presented some evidence to support their thinking. I do not know if they were correct ro not but it does make sense. |
The OPs version of events is also a possibility, based on speculation. We don't know if it's correct, but it does make sense.
| Quote: |
| Quote: |
| You can offer alternative reasons all you want, but based on what the OP has posted (could be true, could be false), it's possible that discrimination has occured. Therefore, the OP is justified in making his initial statement. |
It is possible but the Op hasn't presented anything to confirm his speculation and assumption that it was. |
The op presented his testimony, which is an established form of evidence.
| Quote: |
| Yes but seeing children play the guitars isn't evidence because there is nothing in the observation that determiness intent. Also since the shopkeeper owns the shop, he has the right to serve whom he wants, it is his place not the OPs and what I see is the OP trying to make trouble for a Korean. |
I don't think the OP is talking about children, I assume he meant kids, as in much younger than he is (mid 30s). Yes, the mere sight of the kids playing guitars can be a form of evidence. Take hidden video/photo of the initial refusal to try out the guitar. Then take hidden video/photo of the 'kids' who do try out the guitar. Repeat a few times and you have evidence of discrimination. Also, a shop keeper who serves whomever he wants is exercising 'discrimination'. The OP might be making trouble for the Korean, but if he's correct, he's helping the foreign community.
| Quote: |
| Quote: |
| It's because both are cases of discrimination |
Really? There was no loss of service till Mrs. parks refused to move and the police had to be called. But that was over 50 years ago and people pull out all sorts of things to justify their assumptions today. I highly doubt the OP experienced discrimination, besides it is a lone incident. There is not a movement or laws being done to suppress and opppress FTs. I highly doubt he could prove his case, even if it were true. |
The fact that Rosa Parks can't sit in the front and others can is a form of discrimination. The fact that the OP can buy a guitar, but can't try it out is also a form of discrimination. Both are forms of discrimination. The shop keeper is discriminating. He only allows koreans/asians/young/family etc try out guitars.
| Quote: |
| Quote: |
| But either way, that's a form of discrimination |
Siounds like someone is bending the definitions to get the accusation they want. The Op was disappointed so he thought he would get even by making one sided claims on this board. Does the shopkeeper's actiosn justify the OPs? WHy? |
It's not bending the definition. It's literally the definition.
treatment or consideration of, or making a distinction in favor of or against, a person or thing based on the group, class, or category to which that person or thing belongs rather than on individual merit
Who says the OP is getting even? did you prove intent? Maybe he's just warning others of what might happen at the store. Yes, the shopkeepers action justifies the OPs. The guitars are expensive, you need to test it out before you buy. Unless you're a kid/korean/young etc, you can't test it out. That's useful info if you're not a kid/korean/young/asian etc.
| Quote: |
| Quote: |
| If the OP is telling the truth, he isn't causing problems, he's helping others |
No he is not, he is trying to hurt the shopkeeper. Very few people are in the market for Fenders etc. |
But if the OP is telling the truth, he's helping foreigners. A foreigner who wants to buy a guitar but try it out first would probably want to steer clear of this particular shop.
| Quote: |
| Quote: |
| there's a thread on page 1 about a humidifier that almost killed a guy's wife/kid. Does the guy who started that thread need to provide evidence |
Again ...yes. or are you in the habit of blindly believing one side of the story simply because the guy is white, a FT or American (western)? He claims it almost killed his wife and child but how do we know they didn't make a mistake when they were adding the chemicals? |
[/quote]
So the guy who made the warning shouldn't have until he had proof? even if he wants to help others and prevent harm? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
the_curious
Joined: 04 Oct 2010
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 26, 2011 8:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
Wow, Calendar, what crawled up your butt and died? In case you haven't figured it out yet, you've come across as less than intelligent. Where can I even begin to dissect the rambling mess that is what you've posted in this thread?
| calendar wrote: |
| There is no need to make a federal case out of this incident. |
^ This quote is especially hilarious given all of the legal terminology that you have been (incorrectly) throwing around--in particular your insistence that the OP prove discrimination "beyond a reasonable doubt."
| Quote: |
| No, it is hearsay and that is not admissable in court because it has nothing to substantiate it. |
| Quote: |
Okay I used the wrong word. It is his word against the shop keeper's. Still no evidence of discrimination.
... The OP's perception is not evidence and you cannot claim discrimination when your request is refused. |
| Quote: |
| No, evidence is what supports the testimony or knocks it down. |
WRONG... the term for this is "testimonial evidence," and it is accepted as evidence in court every day.
| Quote: |
| All a good defense attorney has to do is provide reasonable doubt (under the American and most western legal systems) and I have done that. The OP can't prove his claim. |
In a civil rights law suit (discrimination), the burden of proof that the plaintiff carries is FAR BELOW reasonable doubt. You're confusing criminal and civil law. In this kind of situation, the OP would win by what we call a "preponderance of the evidence" in his favor (for example, he shows 50.5% evidence of discrimination and the shopkeeper is only able to show 49.5% evidence that he did not discriminate against the OP. Guess who wins?).
| Quote: |
| If the OP can't prove it, then guess what, that is reasonable doubt. He left the door open for other possibilities and does not have an iron clad case. |
Even in a capital criminal case, where a defendant's life is at stake, the prosecution rarely has an "iron-clad case," so I'm not sure why you're so keen that the OP meet this standard.
| Quote: |
What would you say about a white shopkeeper who did the same thing? You would probably excuse his behavior with the same wordage in the sign I quoted earlier and think nothing of it.
.... No he is not, he is trying to hurt the shopkeeper. Very few people are in the market for Fenders etc. |
Now you're doing exactly what you accused the OP and his supporters of doing, which is assuming someone's intention without absolute proof. Even worse, you're assuming that random people on this board would act a certain way without ANY indication that they would do so.
| Quote: |
| Quote: |
| The direct comparison is the bus and the music arcade. Rosa parks/ OP was not a slave. Nobody forced either of them on the bush. Both were denied services that were provided to the 'locals'. Both situations are directly comparable |
BUT Mrs. Parks was NOT denied services
|
Now you're making it sound like what happened to the OP was worse than what happened to Rosa Parks. I mean, at least she wasn't denied services... 
| Quote: |
| I would rather err on the side of 'preference' than to accuse someone of discrimination. I went to a Korean Tailor once, who wouldn't serve me. Did I get upset and cry discrimination. No. I left the shop disappointed but it was his right not to serve me. and there may be many reasons for his refusal. he is not obligated to serve everyone who walks into his shop. |
And then you went on Dave's ESL to browbeat all those whining ESL teachers into a similarly noble silence, right? How wonderful. Since you're so into freedom of preference, how about letting people who PREFER to complain about perceived racism, complain? Yes, maybe the shopkeeper denied the OP services for a reason entirely unrelated to the OP's race. MAYBE. However, the OP has every right to come onto a public forum and vent his frustration at what HE PERCEIVED to be racism.
OK, I'm kind of buzzed and I'm going to bed, goodbye.
Last edited by the_curious on Mon Sep 26, 2011 10:17 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
calendar
Joined: 22 Sep 2011
Location: being a hermit
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 26, 2011 12:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Testimony is a form of evidence. |
I clicked on your link and this is what I found: testimonies- no dictionary results
No results found for testimonies
Please try spelling the word differently, searching another resource, or typing a new word.
But I am through discussing this and I am going to ignore the_curious as well. I think we hashed it out pretty good and there was no discrimination. It was an assumption and false accusation made by the OP and has no merit whatsoever.
Americans cry discrimination no matter where they are as the three released hikers make the same claim. Surprisingly, they offer no proof either just a lot of innuendo like the OP does. Americans really need to apply these words properly and stop distorting them to fit their spoiled ways. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mayorgc
Joined: 19 Oct 2008
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 26, 2011 1:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| calendar wrote: |
| Quote: |
| Testimony is a form of evidence. |
I clicked on your link and this is what I found: testimonies- no dictionary results
No results found for testimonies
Please try spelling the word differently, searching another resource, or typing a new word.
But I am through discussing this and I am going to ignore the_curious as well. I think we hashed it out pretty good and there was no discrimination. It was an assumption and false accusation made by the OP and has no merit whatsoever.
Americans cry discrimination no matter where they are as the three released hikers make the same claim. Surprisingly, they offer no proof either just a lot of innuendo like the OP does. Americans really need to apply these words properly and stop distorting them to fit their spoiled ways. |
Site appears to be down. Anyways, it defines testimony as a form of evidence. I'd actually like to see your reply to the_curious. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
calendar
Joined: 22 Sep 2011
Location: being a hermit
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 26, 2011 3:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Site appears to be down. Anyways, it defines testimony as a form of evidence. I'd actually like to see your reply to the_curious. |
It is not evidence. If it were then lawyers would not need to get evidence to support the testimony and those who conspire together to harm another person would have free reign to do their damage to innocent people.
Of course you are lumping all testimony into one category. There is a difference between the types of testimony. The OPs post is not evidence but an accusation, Other people would have to testify of similar experiences but that doesn necessarily mean discrimination took lace. it does allow the possibility that a conspiracy was formed against the shop keeper and real independent evidence would be needed to prove the accusation
I do not reply to those who insult and can't discuss properly. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mayorgc
Joined: 19 Oct 2008
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 26, 2011 3:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
It is not evidence. If it were then lawyers would not need to get evidence to support the testimony and those who conspire together to harm another person would have free reign to do their damage to innocent people.
Of course you are lumping all testimony into one category. There is a difference between the types of testimony. The OPs post is not evidence but an accusation, Other people would have to testify of similar experiences but that doesn necessarily mean discrimination took lace. it does allow the possibility that a conspiracy was formed against the shop keeper and real independent evidence would be needed to prove the accusation
I do not reply to those who insult and can't discuss properly. |
Testimony is evidence. You can't refute that. The op's telling of the events is a form of testimony, therefore, it's a form of evidence. Nobody said that that testimony is the only form of evidence. The Ops post is a form of evidence.
Testimony: 2. evidence in support of a fact or statement; proof.
You really should reply to the_curious. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Adventurer
Joined: 28 Jan 2006
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 26, 2011 5:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ThingsComeAround wrote: |
| ZIFA wrote: |
| ThingsCome Around wrote: |
| Guess its a sellers market here? (or the salesmen think so) |
I can't believe the korean economy is so thriving that shopkeepers can afford to turn away customers just because they're feeling lazy. |
I don't believe it either but if you must dress "up" for shopping, something is amiss. Casually dressed Koreans are treated far better than casually dressed foreigners. |
I dress nice enough, but I remember not long ago having some Korean girls served their ice cream at a cafe before I got my coffee, and I came in when the place was empty, the girls came 3 minutes after me. Then again, the guy was not too skilled at making coffee quickly. Maybe, it wasn't prejudice, but, rather, he felt making the ice cream was easier for him....... Lots of foreigners have money so not letting them play the instruments is retarded. I hope one day people can sue over racial discrimination in South Korea. It's high time people are allowed to do that. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
calendar
Joined: 22 Sep 2011
Location: being a hermit
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 26, 2011 6:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mayorgc wrote: |
| Quote: |
It is not evidence. If it were then lawyers would not need to get evidence to support the testimony and those who conspire together to harm another person would have free reign to do their damage to innocent people.
Of course you are lumping all testimony into one category. There is a difference between the types of testimony. The OPs post is not evidence but an accusation, Other people would have to testify of similar experiences but that doesn necessarily mean discrimination took lace. it does allow the possibility that a conspiracy was formed against the shop keeper and real independent evidence would be needed to prove the accusation
I do not reply to those who insult and can't discuss properly. |
Testimony is evidence. You can't refute that. The op's telling of the events is a form of testimony, therefore, it's a form of evidence. Nobody said that that testimony is the only form of evidence. The Ops post is a form of evidence.
Testimony: 2. evidence in support of a fact or statement; proof.
You really should reply to the_curious. |
I think I explained that quite well andhere is a link to back me up:
| Quote: |
tes�ti�mo�ny /ˈtɛstəˌmoʊni, or, especially Brit., -məni/ Show Spelled[tes-tuh-moh-nee, or, especially Brit., -muh-nee] Show IPA
noun, plural -nies.
1. Law . the statement or declaration of a witness under oath or affirmation, usually in court. |
Notice the first definition is not refering to evidence. The OP's post was not evidence, it was a statement or declaration. Now if he got people to corroborrate his statement then it would be evidence:
| Quote: |
2. evidence in support of a fact or statement; proof.
|
His post is not evidence and needs to be proven true first and he cannot do that.
I read through his post and there i snothing there to respond to.
I am now done with this thread as all that is being done is re-hashing old ground. Forgot the link:
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/testimony |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mayorgc
Joined: 19 Oct 2008
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 26, 2011 6:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| calendar wrote: |
| mayorgc wrote: |
| Quote: |
It is not evidence. If it were then lawyers would not need to get evidence to support the testimony and those who conspire together to harm another person would have free reign to do their damage to innocent people.
Of course you are lumping all testimony into one category. There is a difference between the types of testimony. The OPs post is not evidence but an accusation, Other people would have to testify of similar experiences but that doesn necessarily mean discrimination took lace. it does allow the possibility that a conspiracy was formed against the shop keeper and real independent evidence would be needed to prove the accusation
I do not reply to those who insult and can't discuss properly. |
Testimony is evidence. You can't refute that. The op's telling of the events is a form of testimony, therefore, it's a form of evidence. Nobody said that that testimony is the only form of evidence. The Ops post is a form of evidence.
Testimony: 2. evidence in support of a fact or statement; proof.
You really should reply to the_curious. |
I think I explained that quite well andhere is a link to back me up:
| Quote: |
tes�ti�mo�ny /ˈtɛstəˌmoʊni, or, especially Brit., -məni/ Show Spelled[tes-tuh-moh-nee, or, especially Brit., -muh-nee] Show IPA
noun, plural -nies.
1. Law . the statement or declaration of a witness under oath or affirmation, usually in court. |
Notice the first definition is not refering to evidence. The OP's post was not evidence, it was a statement or declaration. Now if he got people to corroborrate his statement then it would be evidence:
| Quote: |
2. evidence in support of a fact or statement; proof.
|
His post is not evidence and needs to be proven true first and he cannot do that.
I read through his post and there i snothing there to respond to.
I am now done with this thread as all that is being done is re-hashing old ground. Forgot the link:
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/testimony |
definition 1 and 2 both apply to the OPs post. The OPs post is testimony which is a form of evidence. the_curious took the time to reply to you, so i figured you'd reply back, that's all. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
travel zen
Joined: 22 Feb 2005
Location: Good old Toronto, Canada
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 26, 2011 8:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I found Koreans to come in two varieties:
Ultra polite and friendly (70%) and Ultra racist/xenophobic and ugly (30%) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
the_curious
Joined: 04 Oct 2010
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Seoulman69
Joined: 14 Dec 2009
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 27, 2011 12:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Someone said that this a result of some foreigner probably coming in and "testing" the guitar for hours like back home, while clearly having no intention to buy it. It's just a cross-cultural misunderstanding. |
Steelrails, you still didn't confirm who said this? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
