Loading
Rosetteismyname Centrist
Plano, Texas US
183 news,
37 videos,
6 blog posts,
1754 comments,
37 forum posts
Recently Submitted News
Democracy Denied: Chnging How DC Works... 4 the Worse
Reaganite - This should help make clear to those still in the ether just how Chairman Zero's virtual dictatorship...
1 commentPresident Ahab and Moby ObamaCare
American Thinker - Indonesia is the world's most populous Muslim-majority nation. It and its leaders have been humiliated twice, in...
America: Still Free, or is it Fascist?
www.lewrockwell.com - A popular slogan of the Italian Fascists under Mussolini was, “Tutto nello Stato, niente al di fuori...
Rush Quotes from Reaganite Republican
Reaganite - Rush Limbaugh quoted from my post on the Obama/Fox interview in the opening minutes of Thursday's show-...
Communist Obama?
realamericanpolitics.wordpress.com - Ever since Barack H. Obama began his quest for the presidency he has been accused of being...
Obama surrenders gulf oil to Moscow
Washington Times - The Obama administration is poised to ban offshore oil drilling on the outer continental shelf until 2012...
WH won't rule out "Slaughter Rule" on Amnesty & other bills
CNSNews - "The very word 'secrecy' is repugnant in a free and open society; and we are as a...
House vote on the Slaughter Solution:222-203
Michelle Malkin - Constitution-butchers prevail, 222-203.Democrats plan a vote on a rule on Sunday that would make changes to the...
- 20 Comments
- Add a comment
Show Newest to Oldest
Show Oldest to Newest
Rosetteismyname (Centrist) - 7 months ago
Reply to YourChoice
You're obviously not big on common sense. I don't dispute she won the case. My point is simply the … Show full comment
You're obviously not big on common sense. I don't dispute she won the case. My point is simply the … Show full comment
You obviously not big in common sense - or actual sense. Your point isn't about her being an asset or not - it is about the fact that you think that it was for another stated reason of firing - if it were then they should have stated that...
You obviously don't know how the legal system works. Maybe you should start learning it.
YourChoice 7 months ago
Reply to Rosetteismyname
YourChoice, the story is NOT a question of your IF hypotheticals.... they don't exist and as a matte … Show full comment
YourChoice, the story is NOT a question of your IF hypotheticals.... they don't exist and as a matte … Show full comment
You're obviously not big on common sense. I don't dispute she won the case. My point is simply they deemed her no longer an asset to the company. If she was, and the whole company used emails with all caps, she would still be there. I've gone back and read many of your posts. You obviously are still learning the legal system and how it works.
Rosetteismyname (Centrist) - 7 months ago
Reply to YourChoice
Why? If she was still an asset why did they terminate her? The probability here is that it was not … Show full comment
Why? If she was still an asset why did they terminate her? The probability here is that it was not … Show full comment
YourChoice, the story is NOT a question of your IF hypotheticals.... they don't exist and as a matter in seeking truth - were not there
She was fired for using ALL CAPS - they mentioned that - if it were not true - then the employer would have denied it. If she was fired for other reasons and they felt the need to state just one of them, then they should have BUT they didn't
The question here isn't why she was fired. That question is answered BEFORE it is even asked. She was fired for using all caps. She won her case! Why did she win? Because it was an accepted practice amongst the office for them to use the ALL CAPS
They said, maybe bold - underline and all red - IF they didn't want the law suit - maybe a more solid reason should have been stated IF one existed - and yes that is very big IF - COMPANY personnel aren't dumb and if there were other reasons they were likely more viable for a law suit then this one - otherwise they wouldn't have given it
Basically it says they didn't have a good reason - otherwise they would have given it and they didn't give her that reason - a solid one - they said she used all caps - she sued - she won
Rosetteismyname (Centrist) - 7 months ago
Reply to Elitheros
She won because her attorneys were better at influencing opinion than the others. That is all a lega … Show full comment
She won because her attorneys were better at influencing opinion than the others. That is all a lega … Show full comment
LOL! You obviously know little about how the legal system and discovery works....
THIS IS NOT TELEVISION - The courtroom in real life is NOT some drama that you watch in the movies either. Attorney's have little impact on finding questions of truth or questions of fact -
This is what the discovery process is for! The legal decision comes down to what was discussed during the deliberations which is inclusive of all things that went down at trial. No attorney would sign off on this if there wasn't a case - HUGE sanctions come down on attorney's if they assist in what can be construed as frivolity
So sorry Elithros - you lose again...
The attorney's are about finding questions of fact and truth that support their side and presenting the evidence of the discovery to the jury. That is what it is about! you really should study it and/or work in a law firm to understand what happens here...
YourChoice 7 months ago
Reply to Rosetteismyname
this isn't the media sucking here - sorry man - what you are saying here is still wrong BECAUSE ---- … Show full comment
this isn't the media sucking here - sorry man - what you are saying here is still wrong BECAUSE ---- … Show full comment
Why? If she was still an asset why did they terminate her? The probability here is that it was not about using all caps in emails. Just ask yourself which makes more sense? Firing a good employee because she used all caps in an email or firing an employee who is no longer wanted for other reasons?
Elitheros (Libertarian) - 7 months ago
Reply to Rosetteismyname
this isn't the media sucking here - sorry man - what you are saying here is still wrong BECAUSE ---- … Show full comment
this isn't the media sucking here - sorry man - what you are saying here is still wrong BECAUSE ---- … Show full comment
They terminated her because they did not want her anymore. Period. Simple as that. She was no longer an asset. No longer needed/desired/wanted by the company. So long, farewell, goodbye! They ousted her. Period. Government should not interfere with such issues. A company can fire staff that are not serving the best need of the company. If her emails were considered to be an issue, than they can fire her. It's not a government concern.
She won not because she was right or wrong, but because her layers argued a case better than the other side. That is all civil law is. It has nothing to do with being correct or in the right or wrong.
Rosetteismyname (Centrist) - 7 months ago
Reply to Elitheros
A company has a right to terminate employees they deem are no longer an asset to the company. The … Show full comment
A company has a right to terminate employees they deem are no longer an asset to the company. The … Show full comment
this isn't the media sucking here - sorry man - what you are saying here is still wrong BECAUSE ----
the company didn't terminate an employee because they deemed her no longer an asset. They terminated her based on an all caps email.
If there is "more than likely" just using all caps AND THAT IS A HUGE IF there - then they never should have said that....
Fact is SHE WON THE CASE
SHE WAS DEEMED CORRECT
THE COMPANY WAS FOUND LIABLE!!!!! (bold - underline - red)
It is interesting which is why I posted it - (and there is no way everything that you post is stop the presses worthy ) - this was marked at "out there" - and yes it is news worthy enough to go on here as you've shown that being that we disagree with your HUGE hypothetical, so called, "IF"
Elitheros (Libertarian) - 7 months ago
Reply to Rosetteismyname
if that were true then she wouldn't have won her case - PERIOD. re-read my comments to you earlie … Show full comment
if that were true then she wouldn't have won her case - PERIOD. re-read my comments to you earlie … Show full comment
She won because her attorneys were better at influencing opinion than the others. That is all a legal decision comes down to. Truth is not of the biggest concern to an attorney, wining is.
Rosetteismyname (Centrist) - 7 months ago
Reply to Kepi
How is using ALL CAPS in an email offensive or harmful to the workings of a company? How about if a … Show full comment
How is using ALL CAPS in an email offensive or harmful to the workings of a company? How about if a … Show full comment
Using all caps in her situation was not offensive as it was a practice in the company - an accepted thing that they did
Rosetteismyname (Centrist) - 7 months ago
Reply to Elitheros
I am not saying that it is per say, it has to do more with the intent of the writer, the tone etc, j … Show full comment
I am not saying that it is per say, it has to do more with the intent of the writer, the tone etc, j … Show full comment
if that were true then she wouldn't have won her case - PERIOD.
re-read my comments to you earlier
Elitheros (Libertarian) - 7 months ago
Reply to Rosetteismyname
a company cannot fire for any reason without an agreement between the employer and the employer... Y … Show full comment
a company cannot fire for any reason without an agreement between the employer and the employer... Y … Show full comment
A company has a right to terminate employees they deem are no longer an asset to the company.
There is likely more ot it than just using CAPS. Her tone outside of emails and her intent could also have been a factor. Though the article will not cover that, why ask digging and journalistic questions anymore>? The media sucks.
I agree it is a bit interesting, but not 'stop the presses worthy' or even page 25 worthy.
Elitheros (Libertarian) - 7 months ago
Reply to Kepi
How is using ALL CAPS in an email offensive or harmful to the workings of a company? How about if a … Show full comment
How is using ALL CAPS in an email offensive or harmful to the workings of a company? How about if a … Show full comment
I am not saying that it is per say, it has to do more with the intent of the writer, the tone etc, just the ALL CAPS is not the whole story.
A company has a right to terminate employees they deem are no longer an asset to the company. Period.
Kepi 7 months ago
Reply to Elitheros
Has nothing to do with political correctness. This is a private matter between a company and an indi … Show full comment
Has nothing to do with political correctness. This is a private matter between a company and an indi … Show full comment
How is using ALL CAPS in an email offensive or harmful to the workings of a company? How about if a politician wins an election and pushes for some kind of government oversight or new tax that will harm the company financially, does that company have the right to terminate the employees who voted for that politician? I know that example is maybe off subject but I really don't understand how capitol letters can harm anyone or anything. Can you tell me your thoughts on how you think caps may have harmed the business? I do not know the labor laws of her country but I wonder if they had some kind of employee handbook that said the use of caps and color is ground for termination. To me this sounds beyond stupid. Maybe if they had told her in the past to stop using caps and color, then sure ok, she was told to do something and refused to comply.
Rosetteismyname (Centrist) - 7 months ago
Reply to Elitheros
Has nothing to do with political correctness. This is a private matter between a company and an indi … Show full comment
Has nothing to do with political correctness. This is a private matter between a company and an indi … Show full comment
a company cannot fire for any reason without an agreement between the employer and the employer... Yes it basically differentiates from state to state...
However in addition if an employer claims that they are firing you for all caps - they need to back it up or hope that they have something else instead such as "peformance" and be able to back it up and not mention the all caps at all.
Odds are she probably had a case. It was 17k so it isn't like she ran off with millions...
Read the story? It was accepted practice in their inner office email to do things like all caps - but it wasn't bold or underlined or red which is why she won her case...
Rosetteismyname (Centrist) - 7 months ago
Reply to Kepi
IT JUST SHOWS HOW RADICAL POLITICAL CORRECTNESS CAN GET IN THE WORLD TODAY. THERE IS NOTHING IN THE … Show full comment
IT JUST SHOWS HOW RADICAL POLITICAL CORRECTNESS CAN GET IN THE WORLD TODAY. THERE IS NOTHING IN THE … Show full comment
lol
Rosetteismyname (Centrist) - 7 months ago
Reply to Elitheros
I fail to see how this is news worthy.
I fail to see how this is news worthy.
I just thought it was interesting... I believe I clicked the "out there" box for this submission
Rosetteismyname (Centrist) - 7 months ago
Reply to Elitheros
I fail to see how this is news worthy.
I fail to see how this is news worthy.
I just thought it was interesting... I believe I clicked the "out there" box for this submission
Elitheros (Libertarian) - 7 months ago
Reply to Kepi
IT JUST SHOWS HOW RADICAL POLITICAL CORRECTNESS CAN GET IN THE WORLD TODAY. THERE IS NOTHING IN THE … Show full comment
IT JUST SHOWS HOW RADICAL POLITICAL CORRECTNESS CAN GET IN THE WORLD TODAY. THERE IS NOTHING IN THE … Show full comment
Has nothing to do with political correctness. This is a private matter between a company and an individual former employee. Nothing more. A company can fire its staff, especially if they are harmful to the workings of company.
1 - 20 / 20
SPREAD THE WORD