[eDebate] Defending edebate and Phil Kerpen

michael hester uwgdebate
Wed Apr 2 14:48:41 CDT 2008


1) the purpose of the edebate archive is so that people in the community who
want to access previous discussions can do so. it is a valuable resource for
tapping into meta-debates about our community

2) we have a man running (and leading his party's nomination process) for
President of the US who has openly admitted to consuming pot and cocaine. if
admitting to doing hard drugs hasn't forfeited his application for the
highest office in the land, i seriously doubt dumbass message board posts
made by college students would keep any qualified person who knew how to not
come across as a pompous ass in an interview from getting a job. it's one
thing for an employer to hold an applicant accountable for their own
postings on a listserv, but to hold someone accoutable for what a college
student says about them in a 'roast'-style awards listing?? is someone who
can't explain that difference to a potential employer really qualified to
have a job that doesn't involve saying "Welcome to Wal-Mart"?

3) Phil Kerpen deserves our thanks, not our scorn. he has basically run
edebate as a non-profit service for the community. to blame him is an insult
- to the work he has done and to the intelligence of anyone who has
reasonable perspective on the matter.

4) to reiterate, no decent employer is going to make a job decision based on
WHAT OTHER COLLEGE STUDENTS POSTED ABOUT YOU ON A MESSAGE BOARD WHEN YOU
WERE IN COLLEGE. yes, they may, and perhaps should, judge you by what YOU
POST, but that means the dummies who post stupid stuff on here should
recognize the consequences of their actions. if law firms (or any other
fancy business) started making hiring/firing decisions based on whether
someone had bad stuff said about them while they were in college, there
wouldn't be any lawyers in the world (oops, is that an impact turn?)

hester
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.ndtceda.com/pipermail/edebate/attachments/20080402/9f569524/attachment.htm 



More information about the Mailman mailing list