4 ms·

> I'm not sure if this answer is in anything posted, however: 1) is that claim of someone with a "crushed spine denied an ambulance" proven, and 2) is "because

by bjl 8y ago

> I'm not sure if this answer is in anything posted, however: 1) is that claim of someone with a "crushed spine denied an ambulance" proven, and 2) is "because it would've shown up on OSHA logs" proven as Tesla's reasoning, or just conjecture and/or speculation? 1) The source is named, and to be included in the article would've likely provided medical records backing up his assertions. Not to mention the fact that Tesla (which has previously demonstrated its willingness to go the media to try and discredit former employees) has not denied his claims. 2) There are multiple sources in the article that mention being taught by lawyers how to deny care in a way that avoids legal requirements to log incidents. > I've never heard of them and likewise That says more about you than the source, Reveal has broken a number of extremely important stories and won many awards for doing so. > is this specific journalist (and perhaps the editor) known and associated with any awards the journal received? You could've just clicked on the author's bio, but yes. "His reporting with a partner and CNN exposed rampant fraud in California's drug rehab system for the poor, winning an Investigative Reporters and Editors Award."

loceng 8y ago
You conveniently ignored the main points of my response - and turned a reasonable question into a put down via "says more about you than the source." You seem to lack intellectual integrity, in case you don't realize that. Done engaging with you. :)
- mdorazio 8y ago
  This response was both hypocritical and immature. I'm disappointed by reading this thread.
  - loceng 8y ago
    Okay, so what was hypocritical and immature about it? Please see bji's other responses in this thread, and perhaps mine, to get a fuller picture. If you have a strong argument point then perhaps you can make me aware of hypocrisy and immaturity - I hope you do so if it's true so I can learn, albeit and alas, most people don't put that effort in and instead make a quick response of simply sharing a loose feeling without deeper critical analysis to understand the situation and feelings in depth; this is in part a problem with the lack of tone in text. I was pointing out their ignoring of the main point of my responses, and pointing out their put down; pointing out a lack of intellectual integrity isn't a put down, whereas saying simply because I haven't heard of a source "says more about me than the source" is nonsensical. Likewise, letting them know I'm done engaging with them is better IMHO than "ghosting" them. How is there integrity in a conversation if someone simply uses put downs and ignores the one main countering point to a proposed solution? Perhaps a gentler or kinder way to put it is they're lacking intellectual honesty - in order to try to prove a point, and backing that up/reenforcing that with a put down.

by bjl 8y ago

loceng 8y ago

You conveniently ignored the main points of my response - and turned a reasonable question into a put down via "says more about you than the source." You seem to lack intellectual integrity, in case you don't realize that. Done engaging with you. :)

mdorazio 8y ago
This response was both hypocritical and immature. I'm disappointed by reading this thread.
- loceng 8y ago
  Okay, so what was hypocritical and immature about it? Please see bji's other responses in this thread, and perhaps mine, to get a fuller picture. If you have a strong argument point then perhaps you can make me aware of hypocrisy and immaturity - I hope you do so if it's true so I can learn, albeit and alas, most people don't put that effort in and instead make a quick response of simply sharing a loose feeling without deeper critical analysis to understand the situation and feelings in depth; this is in part a problem with the lack of tone in text. I was pointing out their ignoring of the main point of my responses, and pointing out their put down; pointing out a lack of intellectual integrity isn't a put down, whereas saying simply because I haven't heard of a source "says more about me than the source" is nonsensical. Likewise, letting them know I'm done engaging with them is better IMHO than "ghosting" them. How is there integrity in a conversation if someone simply uses put downs and ignores the one main countering point to a proposed solution? Perhaps a gentler or kinder way to put it is they're lacking intellectual honesty - in order to try to prove a point, and backing that up/reenforcing that with a put down.