|
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: Sun Nov 16, 2014 8:32 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| Quote: |
| It would be quicker if you just found a report of another Canadian English teacher raped in the same timeframe and with details that matches the OP. |
First, do you have a list off all of the rape victims of the past 5 years and their nationality? Even if there is none of another Canadian, it does not validate your story. You are confusing coincidence with direct linkage.
Yes, its something to consider when we are deciding the veracity of this story, but it is not conclusive. Don't be upset with people if they are not convinced.
You yourself are unable to say conclusively "This is the same person".
| aq8knyus wrote: |
| You make unreasonable demands for proof and ask a rape victim to waive her identity. |
You mean evidence beyond speculation and hearsay? You mean one report from a credible journalism source on this story? (The AM radio station does not meet that standards)
Nothing you have offered is "proof". Let's look at your evidence
1) The person who posted this is real. This does not prove anything. A scammer is a "real" person and may in fact use their real name. It suggests that it might be legitimate, but this person is no more "real" to any of us than any other person out there on the internet.
2) There is a similar report. As discussed, this is coincidence, not a direct link. You yourself do not have conclusive proof that this is the same person. There are similar circumstances, but you don't have anything beyond that. That is the definition of conjecture.
3) The AM radio station report. This story appears to not be vetted and match journalistic norms. There appears to be no attempt by the journalist to contact the Korean police or courts and receive verification of this story. Attempts by others to get this story out to other media outlets failed.
4) The linkage to a 3rd party charity Best I can tell, the linkage was done by the gofundme page operator and not by the charity. This "linkage" appeared to belittle more than someone recommending an organization.
Now, is this sufficient to convince you to fork over 20 bucks? Sure. It's a donation, not a court of law. But at the same time, is it enough so that people ho have doubts about its veracity are being unreasonable? I don't think so. People can naturally be skeptical. There are some quirks. There's a lack of activity or personal updating on the expat boards. There's the odd nature of their fundraiser. There's the weak evidence in support. There's the history of online scams. There's also an underlying "picthfork mob" vibe it got in the way it got everyone riled really fast and then once people started questioning its veracity, the whole story shut down with little more to be heard from the people involved and little in the way of follow up in promoting a more general awareness of the issue. I think once people picked up on that, they started to have reflexive doubts.
Now me personally, someone I could have some confidence in vouched for the story. That was enough for me. I can understand it not being enough for others. What I'm trying to do is to show you how it is perfectly reasonable for them to be deeply skeptical of this and that the merits of this case are not as strong to others as they appear to you. Frankly, I think you overstate the strength of the evidence you are presenting. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
aq8knyus
Joined: 28 Jul 2010
Location: London
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 16, 2014 10:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
Stop pretending that you and the others simply had 'doubts'.
You and the others were claiming it was a scam, a claim is more than doubt and a claim needs evidence.
I have showed more than enough proof to validate my claim, you and the other Benghazi boys haven't provided a single scrap of evidence to support your claim.
It is time for you lot to put up or shut up, where is your evidence? And please no more guff about waygook.org and the number wimmin posters, it is frankly embarrassing.
| Steelrails wrote: |
Yes, its something to consider when we are deciding the veracity of this story, but it is not conclusive. Don't be upset with people if they are not convinced.
You yourself are unable to say conclusively "This is the same person". |
I made it clear pages ago that this was not 100% conclusive as there is no victim identity to cross reference.
There is enough evidence to make a convincing case though and the level of proof you are asking for is unreasonable and ignorant of the pain that victims struggle through.
| Steelrails wrote: |
| First, do you have a list off all of the rape victims of the past 5 years and their nationality? Even if there is none of another Canadian, it does not validate your story. You are confusing coincidence with direct linkage. |
Stop squirming and provide another report of another Canadian English teacher suffering this terrible fate (I hope to god there is none) that matches the dates and details.
If there is none, you have no right to say it is just a coincidence.
| Steelrails wrote: |
| 1) The person who posted this is real. This does not prove anything. A scammer is a "real" person and may in fact use their real name. It suggests that it might be legitimate, but this person is no more "real" to any of us than any other person out there on the internet. |
A scammer would not link their legitimate info and there is zero evidence that he is not legit.
| Steelrails wrote: |
| 2) There is a similar report. As discussed, this is coincidence, not a direct link. You yourself do not have conclusive proof that this is the same person. There are similar circumstances, but you don't have anything beyond that. That is the definition of conjecture. |
Until you find another report that says exactly the same thing, you cannot call it a coincidence.
| Steelrails wrote: |
| 3) The AM radio station report. This story appears to not be vetted and match journalistic norms. There appears to be no attempt by the journalist to contact the Korean police or courts and receive verification of this story. Attempts by others to get this story out to other media outlets failed. |
You have no evidence that they didn't follow 'journalistic norms'. Also I am sure the victim and her friend have access to all the documenatry evidence they would need, seeing as she is the one named in the lawsuit.
| Steelrails wrote: |
| 4) The linkage to a 3rd party charity Best I can tell, the linkage was done by the gofundme page operator and not by the charity. This "linkage" appeared to belittle more than someone recommending an organization. |
Your evidence for this is what exactly? If this was a scam, why would they let more people have the chance to verify what they are saying? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steelrails
Joined: 12 Mar 2009
Location: Earth, Solar System
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 16, 2014 3:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| There is enough evidence to make a convincing case though |
In your mind there is, but in the mind of at least 3 other posters there's at least cause for pause, not to mention the people on the waygook thread. Apparently the case isn't so convincing if all these other people have doubts.
| Quote: |
Stop squirming and provide another report of another Canadian English teacher suffering this terrible fate (I hope to god there is none) that matches the dates and details.
If there is none, you have no right to say it is just a coincidence. |
You don't seem to get it. Even if there is only the one report, that can mean that the scammer just took the news story and constructed a scam around it.
| Quote: |
| A scammer would not link their legitimate info and there is zero evidence that he is not legit. |
Yes, because no con man has ever used their true identity... 
| Quote: |
| Until you find another report that says exactly the same thing, you cannot call it a coincidence. |
Wrong, until you provide identical names, you cannot say it is the same report, it remains coincidence.
| Quote: |
| You have no evidence that they didn't follow 'journalistic norms' |
They didn't attempt to contact the Korean courts and police for comment. That's a basic element of journalism standards.
| Quote: |
Your evidence for this is what exactly? If this was a scam, why would they let more people have the chance to verify what they are saying? |
Because they think most people won't bother. I mean, its in Korean and all. And what did they link beyond "Go here if you need help and they accept donations"?
Again, why is it so hard to accept that its perfectly reasonable for people to be suspicious? I've accepted that it's perfectly reasonable for someone to trust this and donate. There's points on both sides and its enough of a toss-up that one can go one way or the other, but you seem to think that the other side's claims are baseless and your evidence is ironclad, it isn't. It's speculation and hearsay. Until you have something more than that, don't be upset with people for being suspicious. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Underwaterbob
Joined: 08 Jan 2005
Location: In Cognito
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 16, 2014 4:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| aq8knyus wrote: |
| You and the others were claiming it was a scam, a claim is more than doubt and a claim needs evidence. |
I have never - not once - claimed that it was a scam. Much like SR has been trying to plow into your head for the past two pages, I doubted the veracity of the claim due to lack of evidence and only compared it to a scam. That does not mean that I believe that it is a scam. Do you know what "doubt" means? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Savant
Joined: 25 May 2007
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 16, 2014 7:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| It's one thing to be suspicious of an alleged rape story but to go on for days and multiple pages trying to debunk all aspects of the possibility that the story is real is obsessive. I look forward to the next rape debunking story that Steelrails will delight us with. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
aq8knyus
Joined: 28 Jul 2010
Location: London
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 16, 2014 9:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
[quote="Steelrails"]
Put up or shut up.
You and the Benghazi boys were doing more than doubting, you were claiming it was a scam.
Provide evidence to back up your claim it was a scam, not your opinion, evidence.
Find another report to prove that it could be just a coincidence. If there is no other report, it is not a coincidence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
aq8knyus
Joined: 28 Jul 2010
Location: London
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 16, 2014 9:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Underwaterbob wrote: |
| aq8knyus wrote: |
| You and the others were claiming it was a scam, a claim is more than doubt and a claim needs evidence. |
I have never - not once - claimed that it was a scam. Much like SR has been trying to plow into your head for the past two pages, I doubted the veracity of the claim due to lack of evidence and only compared it to a scam. That does not mean that I believe that it is a scam. Do you know what "doubt" means? |
Yes you did rape apologist.
Go and give us another post about how the rapist is innocent. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steelrails
Joined: 12 Mar 2009
Location: Earth, Solar System
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 17, 2014 3:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| aq8knyus wrote: |
| At this point if you still think I am claiming that doubting the reality of the gofundme campaign = rape apologist, you are deliberately misrepresenting my argument. |
Uhm..
| Quote: |
Yes you did rape apologist.
Go and give us another post about how the rapist is innocent. |
He has never said that. He has said its possible that he is innocent. All of his statements regularly used qualifiers to make sure that he wasn't 100% saying "This is a scam".
Aq8kynus, I think you are overlooking the details in what me and underwaterbob are saying. You already kind of aluded to "why do people have to be so pedantic", well sometimes it pays to be.
Those "ifs" "maybes" "doubt" "likelys" "coulds" have a greater significance than you seem to be attaching to them. You seem to gloss over them (a tendency of many posters on this board) and "It could be a scam" becomes "its a scam" when you read it. Now those two sentences look similar, but there is a world of difference in what is being said.
I also think this same like of scrutiny may be also seen in the differing standards regarding the evidence available. If one has a high level of scrutiny towards details, it follows that they might have a higher level of scrutiny towards detail in evidence. Conversely if one has a lower level of scrutiny towards detail in writing, they might have a lower level of scrutiny towards evidence.
The point is, when you read the post, take special care to note the "ifs" "possiblys" and "maybes". |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Underwaterbob
Joined: 08 Jan 2005
Location: In Cognito
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 17, 2014 4:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| aq8knyus wrote: |
| Yes you did rape apologist. |
See what you just said there is a claim. And a very strong one. Now the onus is on you to point out where I explicitly stated that this is a scam. Go ahead, I'll wait. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
aq8knyus
Joined: 28 Jul 2010
Location: London
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 17, 2014 8:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Underwaterbob wrote: |
| aq8knyus wrote: |
| Yes you did rape apologist. |
See what you just said there is a claim. And a very strong one. Now the onus is on you to point out where I explicitly stated that this is a scam. Go ahead, I'll wait. |
Claims that it was just a scam.
| Underwaterbob wrote: |
| All the Nigerian princes need do is start yelling 'rape' apparently. |
| Underwaterbob wrote: |
| For all that we actually know, a bunch of dudebros could have just got to live it up in some juicy bar over the weekend with a cool $4k they made from crying rape on a couple of forums and an e-begging site. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
aq8knyus
Joined: 28 Jul 2010
Location: London
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 17, 2014 8:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Steelrails wrote: |
| aq8knyus wrote: |
| At this point if you still think I am claiming that doubting the reality of the gofundme campaign = rape apologist, you are deliberately misrepresenting my argument. |
Uhm..
| Quote: |
Yes you did rape apologist.
Go and give us another post about how the rapist is innocent. |
He has never said that. He has said its possible that he is innocent. All of his statements regularly used qualifiers to make sure that he wasn't 100% saying "This is a scam".
Aq8kynus, I think you are overlooking the details in what me and underwaterbob are saying. You already kind of aluded to "why do people have to be so pedantic", well sometimes it pays to be.
Those "ifs" "maybes" "doubt" "likelys" "coulds" have a greater significance than you seem to be attaching to them. You seem to gloss over them (a tendency of many posters on this board) and "It could be a scam" becomes "its a scam" when you read it. Now those two sentences look similar, but there is a world of difference in what is being said.
I also think this same like of scrutiny may be also seen in the differing standards regarding the evidence available. If one has a high level of scrutiny towards details, it follows that they might have a higher level of scrutiny towards detail in evidence. Conversely if one has a lower level of scrutiny towards detail in writing, they might have a lower level of scrutiny towards evidence.
The point is, when you read the post, take special care to note the "ifs" "possiblys" and "maybes". |
He has time and again given this guy the benefit of the doubt and challenged the victim's account.
He has said that she could just be crying rape, when false rape accusations are incredibly rare. He has talked about the bribe attempts as stopping his name being dragged through the mud.
"The only thing we have to go on is her word."
"The question we should be asking is why are so many people so ready to prosecute this guy?"
"This article (which doesn't exist at the link provided) is only telling her side of the story. Why didn't the police report say that she was raped? That seems like something you or your lawyer would have made pretty clear."
"Settling out of court is not a bribe. Maybe he didn't want his name dragged through the muck?"
The idiot fails to notice how the guy still has a suspended sentence and from the Korean reports it is clear he had already admitted to indecent assault. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Weigookin74
Joined: 26 Oct 2009
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 17, 2014 10:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Wow! I was p!$$ed when I started this. But, I'm surprised it's still going 17 pages strong. Just so you know, the girl raised the money she needed. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Underwaterbob
Joined: 08 Jan 2005
Location: In Cognito
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 18, 2014 2:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
| aq8knyus wrote: |
| Underwaterbob wrote: |
| All the Nigerian princes need do is start yelling 'rape' apparently. |
|
com·pare
kəmˈper/
verb
verb: compare; 3rd person present: compares; past tense: compared; past participle: compared; gerund or present participle: comparing
1.
estimate, measure, or note the similarity or dissimilarity between.
"individual schools compared their facilities with those of others in the area"
synonyms: contrast, juxtapose, collate, differentiate
"we compared the data sets"
| aq8knyus wrote: |
| Underwaterbob wrote: |
| For all that we actually know, a bunch of dudebros could have just got to live it up in some juicy bar over the weekend with a cool $4k they made from crying rape on a couple of forums and an e-begging site. |
|
could
ko͝od,kəd/
verb
modal verb: could
past of can1.
used to indicate possibility.
"they could be right"
I'm just going to assume at this point that you think 'rape apologist' means 'one swell bloke'. Thanks! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
aq8knyus
Joined: 28 Jul 2010
Location: London
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 18, 2014 6:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
A rape apologist is someone who makes excuses for rapists and talks about women 'crying rape' when that very rarely happens.
It is not something you should want to be and so I understand your panicked attempts to try an deny what you wrote.
However, it doesn't have to be this tortuous.
Simply empathise with the victim, stop doubting her story and make a clear statement that the the guy in question is a rapist. Once you have done this you will no longer be a rape apologist and you can go on with your life safe in the knowledge that you are a 'nice guy'.
Compliance will be rewarded. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
geldedgoat
Joined: 05 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 18, 2014 8:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
| aq8knyus wrote: |
| [F]alse rape accusations are incredibly rare. |
The spread of affirmative consent laws across the US disagrees with this statement. |
|
| 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
