Ignorance Still Reigns...And I'm Not Letting It Pass

just pointing out the reality. JoePa was a different man and had a profound positive effect on tens-hundres of thousands, if not millions, of people. The writer that came up with this crap…well he’s only a student so I suppose he has time, but he’s not really getting off to the best start.

Also: I too will likely not have tens of thousands of people attend my funeral/memorial (if I even have a memorial)

That sometimes moving on is a good thing and that we don’t always want to hear about this a constant daily reminder of pain is not a “Good thing” all it serves is to hurt yourself and others around you. Sometimes you gotta rip the band-aid off let the healing begin and go onto something else. Then again some people feed of the pain of others…

Forestry majors, drinking in the Woods. And the Bud Dwyer bench. Interesting party.

what is there to really write about? The posts would be, “Alleged victims’ names to be provided to Sandusky’s lawyers by Friday,” and, “Prosecution requesting an out-of-county jury.”

It’s worth a very brief mention, but not much more. Additionally, while I enjoy the community at BSD, it’s not my first stop for news stories.

Don’t see much about that since it only deals with whether or not the child molester will be convicted, not about the morality of Joe Paterno. But the “cult of everybody” really cares about child abuse.

Un-molested is EXACTLY what we’re going for.

Are you saying you’re pro-molestation?

I kid, I kid.

Write about what you feel is appropriate.

Or you could tell the people who run a blog that you frequent what you think they should do differently.

presentment is "a lie" partly because there was no victim 2.

This isn’t true at all. People have said that fact that as far as I’m aware, the prosecution doesn’t know who Victim #2 is. Sexual Abuse victims are rarely publicly identified. But there is an enormous difference between not known to the public, and not know to the prosecution. The fact the prosecution doesn’t know who Victim #2 is a huge problem with their case.

Your kidding yourself if you think hundreds of thousands of people are clicking into the comments of these fanposts and re-reading hundreds of comments that are essentially carbon copies of discussions that have already happened in similar fanposts and front page posts every single week — not to mention every other site covering any portion of the scandal — ongoing for months now. Hell, half the comment I’m responding to right now is virtually the same thing you posted eight digital inches above this one.

Everytime I see a comment thread devlove into this, immediately check out.

I did mean it the other day, though, when I told SilverFoxx to keep it up. I look at M1EK like the ‘ghost’ of Darth Vader that Luke had to fight in the cave on Dagobah – he’s a sandbox version of the people you meet outside of BSD, and a good way for newcomers to the Joe Apologists Club to hone their arguments prior to trying them out in real life.

I stopped commenting as frequently because seemingly every thread turned into repeats of ones 2 months ago. When things head in that direction, I leave.

I may have understood this incorrectly, but by saying:

You could choose to act in a way which makes it clear you do not actually believe the way the mob does, if you do not want to be viewed that way. Even participating once in a while in those comment threads to restrain those people would be a start. But you don’t.

Is that some sort of blackmail for the Mods here. Basically telling them, if you dont want your website to appear like a “cult” to those outside the the “wagon circle” that they should comment disagreeing with what the majority of commentors opinions are whether the said Mod believes in that opinion or not?

You’re ignoring the point
How many bureaucrats are seen organizing police in riots?

You say "JUST" a bureaucrat but the sworn facts do not support that.

Or because answering truthfully kills your argument so you’ll just ignore it?

… and you call us conspiracy theorists.

1.) Almost none of the outside world is even remotely educated on the facts of this whole mess like the people who post here, including you.

2.) Much of the outside world does not vilify Joe Paterno. Most of the outside world sees him as a great man who, as Jesse. stated, was the most famous person that didn’t do enough. I would argue that those that think Paterno’s grave needs to be pissed on or think that PSU or the people that post here are cultists etc. are in a distinct minority.

He mentions the funeral procession – which isn’t quite the same thing – and it was a long procession (I watched it at my desk; I know).

Before that, he uses this sentence:

Which is how I felt over the swooning that took place when Joe Paterno died. If his former players and if the current Penn State students want to proselytize what a great man he was, they have to at least acknowledge why someone so otherwise beloved and respected had to be fired in disgrace.

I wouldn’t characterize that as demanding a condemnation at the funeral itself. More like, why wasn’t IT mentioned more often in the days around his death, instead of being swept under the rug.

And I get why it was swept under the rug. But don’t mischaracterize the opposition just to make them look dumber.

This connection sucks and I have to go in a minute. So this is brief.

You are engaged in confirmation bias. Joe Paterno had every chance to paint himself in the best possible light, and what he came up with was (pphrased) “I was afraid to follow up because I didn’t want to prejudice any investigation”. Not “I did follow up but…”; Not “I followed up with X but not with Y”; etc.

Also, Paterno at 75 is not McQueary at 25. He used to be the AD: had worked at PSU for a half a century. He knew Schultz was just a bureaucrat. It strains credulity to suggest he was fooled (but MM could easily have been).

If you want to continue to claim those are just differences of opinion, go ahead. I will not treat you with kid gloves because you insist on holding to your own facts, though.

I feel bad for him having to be in that position. I just don’t envy him.

it is necessary to acknowledge that any recounting or reacting to events by a person will necessarily be imperfect due to a series of biases we ALL use in laying down memories and interpreting others actions.

In short, human beings are not machines with unending resources for gathering input simultaneously from all senses, remembering/processing that input, and regurgitating that input (in point of fact, even the best of machines have finite limits on these things… often more limiting than humans).

Any bias or set of biases will never adequately explain human behavior, but understanding that biases do exist allows one to expand the possible reactions a human being might “reasonably” have given a set of circumstances.

Said another way, as a psychologist I would never attempt to explain what someone actually did based on a cognitive bias, but I would use an awareness of those cognitive biases to help judge whether that response (output) was actually reasonable given the set of circumstances (input).

The only arguments (I think) where I’ve invoked cognitive biases as an explanation is to illustrate that the actions of certain people are really not that far out of line with what you might expect of anyone in their situation. And I think that’s where the utility is (broadly speaking).

is that you say ‘when an alleged pedophile slips through the cracks’ – How would Joe (or anyone) have known, after having been told by Curley that the situation had been handled, that this is what had happened? I would have assumed that the investigation didn’t turn up anything that was legally actionable. I’d keep my grandkids away from Sandusky just to be on the safe side, and probably tell people I trusted to do the same, but I wouldn’t go inviting the shitstorm that can rain down from false accusations when, as far as I know, there’s nothing to be done.

In a perfect world with complete information he should have acted differently. I, like you, have been trying to use the “reasonable person standard” here. Maybe my fault is that I’m trying to use my judgement to define that standard, but it is all I have. I just don’t think I’d be all that upset (to the point of blaming someone who was relayed a secondhand account, and calling them a monster who should burn in hell) if this happened to anyone else based on the information supposedly known by Paterno at the time.