Not trying to make this political. Just my observation relating to Grudens resignation. As a person that has had their emails investigated in the workplace I think it's unfortunate that in a supposed free society that emails written years ago intended only for the eyes of those to whom they were written can be used by anyone as evidence of a persons overall attitude toward certain people or groups of people.
My investigation didn't result in anything but it sure makes you think about what you are writing before you hit send. Could any NFL owners, company executives, etc. hold up to investigating the last 20 years of emails? How would it go for you? I'm not a Gruden fan but it seems like targeting to me.
Be sure and stay professional in your emails.
If those would have been faxes the people using them would have committed a federal crime. There is a program you can buy the erases all your social posts after a set time, say three months. I'm not on FaceChat or SnapBook or any of those, but it's a good idea.
No Gruden fan either but how is someone able to get emails from 10 years ago for a personal account?
That is the part of the story that sends chills up my spine. Scary stuff.
I'm not familiar with this story, and have no idea who Grudens is. From my point of view, my work email belongs to my employer. Government employees' and elected officials' email belong to the public. My personal email belongs to me, and should not be viewed by outside parties without my permission or a legal search warrant. I recognize that "permission" is impossible to control when I am in fact sending my email to other people, who may do with it what they wish. As I was told in elementary school, before the internet was invented, "Be careful what you write on paper, it may be read aloud to the whole class."
There is a reason that every state has a statute of limitations.
... how is someone able to get emails from 10 years ago for a personal account?
from the person it was sent to. Who may, possibly, have saved it to use as blackmail.
This is totally ridiculous. Private should mean PRIVATE. It is of no concern of anyone other than the sender and the sendee..............for a moment in time. Similar to telephone conversations. No absolute proof of need, no wiretap.
I think this all got started when a certain US Secretary of Agriculture shared what he described as a joke before he ever repeated it to a handful of people in the early 1970's. Someone then repeated the joke and reported he was the source of the joke. Something about loose shoes, something else and a warm place for defecation purposes.
Next we got into undocumented baby sitters and nannies for Congressmen's children.
I rarely use my personal email for anything at all. My company email is just that, any email I type is strictly business, none of my friends or family have my company address. I've seen a few people pretty heavily repremanded for misusing their companie email addresses.
While I agree with you about some points, it's hard to argue the targeting. I mean, these are his own words taking him down, not someone's hearsay.
And I don't know if his resignation was forced or not, but he'd have had a tough time leading the team after that, I'd suspect.
That said, I don't agree with what happened, and hope that some of my old emails never see the light of day
I don't consider any email personal. I mean, if I controlled my own server then maybe I'd call it my personal email... but a non-work gmail or yahoo account? Oh HELL no. Personally, I rarely send non-work emails so Gruden's problem is pretty foreign to me, but the obvious lesson seems if you have something to say that could be weaponized against you then best say it in person.
Anyway, from what I saw of the football thing Gruden basically criticized (crudely) affirmative action hires. Coming from a guy who has worked in a field where people win jobs based on merit I found his comments completely unsurprising.
One time when I was young, I had a personal email forwarded to someone else that I did not want to see what I wrote. From then on, certain conversations happen on the phone only. I wasn't ashamed of what I wrote, but it was completely out of context at the point it got back to me. It has made me much more careful.
That said, something said 10 years ago might be very acceptable back then, and completely unacceptable now. We need to understand that people grow and change. Judging yesterday by today's standards is what happens when judging a survey in the mountains from 1850 against a survey with modern equipment. Hopefully, us surveyors do not fall into that murky mess.
@norman-oklahoma The court of public opinion has no statute of limitations. In fact, judgment seems to become more harsh over time. Society has lost the ability to view comments and actions through the lense available at the time...
That said, something said 10 years ago might be very acceptable back then, and completely unacceptable now. We need to understand that people grow and change. Judging yesterday by today's standards is what happens when judging a survey in the mountains from 1850 against a survey with modern equipment.
100%. I would be concerned if we were looking back and didn't find some of our attitudes and concepts to be outdated and/or incompatible with current standards...because we're supposed to be improving and growing.
But that doesn't mean that everything in the past is automatically bad. Sometimes certain aspects of events or a personality trait of a historical individual are now considered unethical or immoral - that doesn't make every single part of that event or that entire person wholly evil. Every single history professor I had warned about judging the past by the present.
Complexity is a part of life. Humans are bad at nuance in general, and even more so in a sound-bite, entertainment-oriented, intellectually incurious society.
That being said, it's a digital world. Assume everything you put out there is going to stay out there, and might come back around.
I get it now. The NFL was investigating the WFT over sexual misconduct and these emails turned up. Gruden sent them to Bruce Allen. He said bad things about Rodger Goodell in the emails which probably really doomed him.
@bstrand That's the spot Mike leach found himself in. Turned it into a complete shitstorm, and Tech ended up with Tommy Tuberville. Greatest team on earth under Mike Leach. Next year under Tuberville they had to create a new bowl so Tech didn't get left out.