ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 10th November 2019, 04:35 PM   #41
Puppycow
Penultimate Amazing
 
Puppycow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 24,214
https://www.chicagotribune.com/subur...b5y-story.html

Quote:
Multiple employees were fired from a Buffalo Wild Wings restaurant in Naperville after some customers said their group was asked to move to another table because of the color of their skin.
Buffalo Wild Wings spokesperson Clarie Kudlata in an email late Sunday said the company conducted a thorough, internal investigation and “terminated the employees involved.” She said a service manager and shift manager were fired.
So supposedly the company conducted a thorough investigation.

The story doesn't mention the ethnicity of the employees fired or of the racist customer but it does mention that the customer in question was a regular customer and apparently had some kind of standing request to not be seated near black people. I'm wondering now who the customer was?
__________________
A fool thinks himself to be wise, but a wise man knows himself to be a fool.
William Shakespeare

Last edited by Puppycow; 10th November 2019 at 04:44 PM.
Puppycow is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th November 2019, 05:11 PM   #42
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 12,917
Originally Posted by Puppycow View Post
https://www.chicagotribune.com/subur...b5y-story.html



So supposedly the company conducted a thorough investigation.

The story doesn't mention the ethnicity of the employees fired or of the racist customer but it does mention that the customer in question was a regular customer and apparently had some kind of standing request to not be seated near black people. I'm wondering now who the customer was?
Seriously?

Someone comes into my place of business with that attitude, they get shown the door immediately, and are told not to cast a shadow on my doorstep again. They get no opportunity to ever become a "regular customer".
__________________
"You can't promote principled anti-corruption action without pissing-off corrupt people!" - George Kent on Day one of the Trump Impeachment Hearings
If you don't like my posts, my opinions, or my directness then put me on your ignore list.
This will be of benefit to both of us; you won't have to take umbrage at my posts, and I won't have to waste my time talking to you... simples! !
smartcooky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th November 2019, 05:19 PM   #43
Puppycow
Penultimate Amazing
 
Puppycow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 24,214
Here's the original Facebook post apparently

https://m.facebook.com/photo.php?fbi...type=3&theater
__________________
A fool thinks himself to be wise, but a wise man knows himself to be a fool.
William Shakespeare
Puppycow is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th November 2019, 05:48 PM   #44
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 12,917
Originally Posted by Puppycow View Post
Here's the original Facebook post apparently

https://m.facebook.com/photo.php?fbi...type=3&theater
That's pretty conclusive, and answers the question as to why they were asked their race.

Those who reckon they were smelling a BS story here need to have their olfactory apparatus tested. What they were smelling was the vile stench of racism.


Edit: For a moment there, I was wondering why the facebook page looked so odd. It didn't seem to be formatted like any Facebook page I have seen before. Then I realised it was a mobile Facebook page being displayed on a computer browser.... deleted the "m." from the URL, and presto - it looks right
__________________
"You can't promote principled anti-corruption action without pissing-off corrupt people!" - George Kent on Day one of the Trump Impeachment Hearings
If you don't like my posts, my opinions, or my directness then put me on your ignore list.
This will be of benefit to both of us; you won't have to take umbrage at my posts, and I won't have to waste my time talking to you... simples! !

Last edited by smartcooky; 10th November 2019 at 06:15 PM.
smartcooky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th November 2019, 05:58 PM   #45
Thermal
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 8,852
They took the kids to Hooters instead. I love this.

The whole 'yeah, these regulars are racist' thing is still weird, though. What were they, high rollers? You lose more business catering to a couple douchebags than serving the public at large. If the manager was aware of this and let it go on, s/he is the primary culprit, not the floor staff.
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th November 2019, 06:00 PM   #46
Thermal
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 8,852
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
That's pretty conclusive, and answers the question as to why they were asked their race.

Those who reckon they were smelling a BS story here need to have their olfactory apparatus tested. What they were smelling was the vile stench of racism.
One side of the story is conclusive? If you say so.
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th November 2019, 06:20 PM   #47
Puppycow
Penultimate Amazing
 
Puppycow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 24,214
I'd say the preponderance of the evidence at this point points to the allegations being true.

The company says that they conducted a "thorough, internal investigation" and as a result fired at least 2 employees and banned the racist customer in question for life.

Quote:
Buffalo Wild Wings spokesperson Clarie Kudlata in an email late Sunday said the company conducted a thorough, internal investigation and “terminated the employees involved.” She said a service manager and shift manager were fired.
This is apparently more than just "one side of the story" because the company did an investigation and apparently found that there were in fact grounds for firing the employees and banning the customer. I don't really see any compelling grounds at this points to reach a different conclusion.
__________________
A fool thinks himself to be wise, but a wise man knows himself to be a fool.
William Shakespeare
Puppycow is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th November 2019, 06:25 PM   #48
abaddon
Penultimate Amazing
 
abaddon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 19,317
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
That's pretty conclusive, and answers the question as to why they were asked their race.

Those who reckon they were smelling a BS story here need to have their olfactory apparatus tested. What they were smelling was the vile stench of racism.
Not even vaguely convincing of anything. A still image of a watron with a solo...person, race indeterminate, accompanied by an anecdote of unknown provenance or veracity. You find that convincing?

Now, if the anecdote happens to be true, then you are correct, it is a scurrilous racist bigoted bucket of unacceptable crap.

Nevertheless, you of all people should know the evidential value of anecdotes.

So what can we see in the image? A solo diner with an attendant waitron. No hint as to the ethnicity of the customer, could be any ethnicity. No hint of a party of 18 either. No hint of the claimed racist anybody anywhere. The image can simply be dismissed as evidence of anything.

On to the text. As described, sure. It is blatant racism, no question. Just how accurate is the description? I have no idea and neither do you.

Now, I would be quite happy to drop the racist hammer were it warranted as you should be well aware, but I simply cannot see the evidence here. It may have happened as described, and it would not surprise me at all if it did, but where is the hard evidence? Anecdotes from exclusively one side of the interaction simply do not cut the evidential mustard.

ETA: It is possible that you thought you posted a video. You posted a still at best. I checked on a couple of devices to be sure. If that was supposed to be a video, it isn't.
__________________
Who is General Failure? And why is he reading my hard drive?


...love and buttercakes...

Last edited by abaddon; 10th November 2019 at 06:29 PM.
abaddon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th November 2019, 06:38 PM   #49
Thermal
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 8,852
Red face

Originally Posted by Puppycow View Post
I'd say the preponderance of the evidence at this point points to the allegations being true.

The company says that they conducted a "thorough, internal investigation" and as a result fired at least 2 employees and banned the racist customer in question for life.



This is apparently more than just "one side of the story" because the company did an investigation and apparently found that there were in fact grounds for firing the employees and banning the customer. I don't really see any compelling grounds at this points to reach a different conclusion.
How about " man, this is gonna be bad press. Fire people and apologize, throw in some horse **** about sensitivity training and wait for it to blow over".

We have zero from the actual accused. Not exactly conclusive or preponderance of anything yet. So far, the evidence is 'guy with hand out for check says', and uninvolved parties fired anonymous people giving boilerplate explanation.

Or more simply, Jack ****.
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th November 2019, 06:49 PM   #50
Brainster
Penultimate Amazing
 
Brainster's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 17,169
Originally Posted by Puppycow View Post
https://www.chicagotribune.com/subur...b5y-story.html

So supposedly the company conducted a thorough investigation.

The story doesn't mention the ethnicity of the employees fired or of the racist customer but it does mention that the customer in question was a regular customer and apparently had some kind of standing request to not be seated near black people. I'm wondering now who the customer was?
Wow. I work nights at bars in an area of town that is pretty whitebread even for a city that is pretty whitebread (Phoenix). And I can tell you that any customer who made that request at my place would get escorted out promptly. Unless he drank enough in which case they would try to bury him near the pot-vapers.
__________________
My new blog: Recent Reads.
1960s Comic Book Nostalgia
Visit the Screw Loose Change blog.
Brainster is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th November 2019, 06:53 PM   #51
Mumbles
Philosopher
 
Mumbles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 7,326
...and as we all know, there's almost no chance of anti-black racism occurring in a suburb of a major city that saw its population explode during the Civil Rights Movement.

At this point, the story is literally weeks old. If folks wanted to create a defense, they would likely have done so. I expect this from certain posters, but I'm a bit disappointed in a couple of people clinging to the "but, *******!" defense of this.

Find a tape. Find counter-evidence, bring it up...

Not saying it's impossible that this wasn't a setup, much like there aren't a few women who make false rape allegations...but where's the evidence?
Mumbles is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th November 2019, 07:05 PM   #52
Puppycow
Penultimate Amazing
 
Puppycow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 24,214
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
How about " man, this is gonna be bad press. Fire people and apologize, throw in some horse **** about sensitivity training and wait for it to blow over".

We have zero from the actual accused. Not exactly conclusive or preponderance of anything yet. So far, the evidence is 'guy with hand out for check says', and uninvolved parties fired anonymous people giving boilerplate explanation.

Or more simply, Jack ****.
That would be a really stupid thing for a company to do if there were no merit to the charges. I really doubt that. Fire people first and ask questions later? No. They say they did a "thorough" internal investigation. If they did not, then maybe the fired employees and even the customer might have grounds to sue.
__________________
A fool thinks himself to be wise, but a wise man knows himself to be a fool.
William Shakespeare

Last edited by Puppycow; 10th November 2019 at 07:06 PM.
Puppycow is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th November 2019, 07:12 PM   #53
abaddon
Penultimate Amazing
 
abaddon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 19,317
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
Edit: For a moment there, I was wondering why the facebook page looked so odd. It didn't seem to be formatted like any Facebook page I have seen before. Then I realised it was a mobile Facebook page being displayed on a computer browser.... deleted the "m." from the URL, and presto - it looks right
Yeah. Been there, done that. Nothing changes. You have a pic of some unknown person apparently placing an order with an unknown waitress at an unknown location followed by a screed of text which may or may not refer to the leading picture. And that gets anybody precisely where, exactly? Well let's google search the image. What does that get us? IKEA folding chairs is what it gets. No other matches. It is a single source of some anonymous bloke in some anonymous diner with some anonymous server. Colour me unimpressed.

But for the sake of thoroughness, lets churn it through some other image tools I use...

One result. That facebook page. And that is it.

OK, Let's examine the EXIF data of that image...Wheeeee, it has none.

Smelling a rat yet? No?
__________________
Who is General Failure? And why is he reading my hard drive?


...love and buttercakes...
abaddon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th November 2019, 07:19 PM   #54
Thermal
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 8,852
Originally Posted by Puppycow View Post
That would be a really stupid thing for a company to do if there were no merit to the charges. I really doubt that. Fire people first and ask questions later? No. They say they did a "thorough" internal investigation. If they did not, then maybe the fired employees and even the customer might have grounds to sue.
See the Eating at Chipoltes While Black thread. That is exactly what the company did. Fired the manager, then rehired her when facts came out.

Some states can fire for good reasons, bad reasons, or no reason at all. They would likely face no meritorious suit for firing workers without a strong case for wrongful dismissal.

Last edited by Thermal; 10th November 2019 at 07:26 PM.
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th November 2019, 07:25 PM   #55
Thermal
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 8,852
Originally Posted by Mumbles View Post
...and as we all know, there's almost no chance of anti-black racism occurring in a suburb of a major city that saw its population explode during the Civil Rights Movement.

At this point, the story is literally weeks old. If folks wanted to create a defense, they would likely have done so. I expect this from certain posters, but I'm a bit disappointed in a couple of people clinging to the "but, *******!" defense of this.

Find a tape. Find counter-evidence, bring it up...

Not saying it's impossible that this wasn't a setup, much like there aren't a few women who make false rape allegations...but where's the evidence?
I'd say the burden of proof is on the claimants, not on anyone else to provide counter evidence.

What do they present as evidence? A claim in a vacuum with a lawyer posed for a shakedown. Witnesses? Even Facebook postings from others who know the racist patrons? Anything besides 'trust us, and hand over a check'?
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th November 2019, 07:35 PM   #56
Mumbles
Philosopher
 
Mumbles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 7,326
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
I'd say the burden of proof is on the claimants, not on anyone else to provide counter evidence.

What do they present as evidence? A claim in a vacuum with a lawyer posed for a shakedown. Witnesses? Even Facebook postings from others who know the racist patrons? Anything besides 'trust us, and hand over a check'?
One of the objecting white patrons wore a hoodie. Or baggy pants. Or whatever. Thus, they were thugs, and should have been shot.

There.

Look, if you want to take up cause with the white supremacists here, feel free to do so. I won't object, and likewise, I won't say anything when they inevitably backstab you. Just tell me, so I can put you on my Ignore list and be done with it.

At the moment, this seems to be "Case Closed". A few people were fired, a few quit their jobs, there's nothing contradicting the offended party. I'm welcome to new evidence, but until then, after weeks of inquiry, I see no need to second-guess anything.
Mumbles is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th November 2019, 08:08 PM   #57
Thermal
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 8,852
Originally Posted by Mumbles View Post
One of the objecting white patrons wore a hoodie. Or baggy pants. Or whatever. Thus, they were thugs, and should have been shot.

There.

Look, if you want to take up cause with the white supremacists here, feel free to do so. I won't object, and likewise, I won't say anything when they inevitably backstab you. Just tell me, so I can put you on my Ignore list and be done with it.
The hell are you talking about?

Maybe this will make it clearer for you: I was once accused of assault as part of a larger civil case. The plaintiffs made their claim in a vacuum, no witnesses, and it failed on proofs. That's how I view any claim where a lawyer is sniffing for a check. It has nothing to do with 'taking up cause with the white supremacists here'. It has to do with knowing how a shakedown works with 'corporate citizens'. Put me on ignore if you like. In fact, if that's how you interpret a cynical evaluation, I'll consider it done.

Quote:
At the moment, this seems to be "Case Closed". A few people were fired, a few quit their jobs, there's nothing contradicting the offended party. I'm welcome to new evidence, but until then, after weeks of inquiry, I see no need to second-guess anything.
Many of us only heard this story here. And I see no evidence to indicate that the claim has merit. Were there some sleazebag racists there? Probably quite a few. The manager still interests me, though, as well as who exactly these bigoted patrons were and why they commanded such compliance with staff.

Last edited by Thermal; 10th November 2019 at 08:10 PM.
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th November 2019, 08:50 PM   #58
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 12,917
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
One side of the story is conclusive? If you say so.

BOTH sides of the story have been confirmed - what more evidence do you need?
__________________
"You can't promote principled anti-corruption action without pissing-off corrupt people!" - George Kent on Day one of the Trump Impeachment Hearings
If you don't like my posts, my opinions, or my directness then put me on your ignore list.
This will be of benefit to both of us; you won't have to take umbrage at my posts, and I won't have to waste my time talking to you... simples! !
smartcooky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th November 2019, 09:04 PM   #59
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 12,917
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
I'd say the burden of proof is on the claimants, not on anyone else to provide counter evidence.?
Utter tripe

1. The claimants have made their claim.

2. Those against whom the claim was made, have carried out an internal investigation, have admitted the claim, and taken actions - they have:
a. apologised to the claimants, and
b. fired those staff members responsible, and
c. banned the racist customer, and
d. undertaken to review their policies.

BOTH sides have agreed that this incident did happen.
End of story - case closed.

The concilience of evidence is now heavily weighted in favour of the claimants. Anyone wishing to overturn the concilience of evidence now has the burden to prove their case.
__________________
"You can't promote principled anti-corruption action without pissing-off corrupt people!" - George Kent on Day one of the Trump Impeachment Hearings
If you don't like my posts, my opinions, or my directness then put me on your ignore list.
This will be of benefit to both of us; you won't have to take umbrage at my posts, and I won't have to waste my time talking to you... simples! !

Last edited by smartcooky; 10th November 2019 at 09:05 PM.
smartcooky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th November 2019, 10:09 PM   #60
Thermal
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 8,852
Talking

Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
Utter tripe

1. The claimants have made their claim.

2. Those against whom the claim was made, have carried out an internal investigation, have admitted the claim, and taken actions - they have:
a. apologised to the claimants, and
b. fired those staff members responsible, and
c. banned the racist customer, and
d. undertaken to review their policies.

BOTH sides have agreed that this incident did happen.
End of story - case closed.

The concilience of evidence is now heavily weighted in favour of the claimants. Anyone wishing to overturn the concilience of evidence now has the burden to prove their case.
Regarding #2: meaningless. Vague boilerplate PR response. We still heard nothing from the host or waitress or manager, who are in fact the accused here. Buffalo Wings sheds zero light on what happened, and their generic damage control response is not 'their side'; it is their loss mitigation. In an actual court, it would probably be considered evasion or no contest.

Perhaps you have other information, yes? Where the company says specifically who said what? None of this boilerplate humble pie. Specifics. Charges are being filed against the employees who violated the team's civil rights, yes?

We have a claim, a PR response, and no supporting evidence. And a lawyer looking for a payday. Good enough for you, I see. I remain skeptical.
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th November 2019, 10:23 PM   #61
Puppycow
Penultimate Amazing
 
Puppycow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 24,214
I gotta side with smartcooky on this one.

Again, the company has claimed to have done a "thorough" internal investigation of the facts. Further, it's already been several days since the employees were fired (date of article above is Nov. 4th). I see no evidence of any public pushback against the company's response. Unless and until that happens, the narrative of the claimants remains unchallenged, and I disagree that the company would take this path if the facts they discovered in their internal investigation didn't support their claims.
__________________
A fool thinks himself to be wise, but a wise man knows himself to be a fool.
William Shakespeare
Puppycow is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th November 2019, 10:37 PM   #62
cullennz
Embarrasingly illiterate
 
cullennz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,476
Originally Posted by abaddon View Post
Not even vaguely convincing of anything. A still image of a watron with a solo...person, race indeterminate, accompanied by an anecdote of unknown provenance or veracity. You find that convincing?

Now, if the anecdote happens to be true, then you are correct, it is a scurrilous racist bigoted bucket of unacceptable crap.

Nevertheless, you of all people should know the evidential value of anecdotes.

So what can we see in the image? A solo diner with an attendant waitron. No hint as to the ethnicity of the customer, could be any ethnicity. No hint of a party of 18 either. No hint of the claimed racist anybody anywhere. The image can simply be dismissed as evidence of anything.

On to the text. As described, sure. It is blatant racism, no question. Just how accurate is the description? I have no idea and neither do you.

Now, I would be quite happy to drop the racist hammer were it warranted as you should be well aware, but I simply cannot see the evidence here. It may have happened as described, and it would not surprise me at all if it did, but where is the hard evidence? Anecdotes from exclusively one side of the interaction simply do not cut the evidential mustard.

ETA: It is possible that you thought you posted a video. You posted a still at best. I checked on a couple of devices to be sure. If that was supposed to be a video, it isn't.
Off topic, but what is a "waitron"?

Thought the first one was a spelling error and then it happened again.
__________________
I generally oppose gun control, but I support the ban on assault weapons and I support a slightly longer waiting period to purchase a gun. With todayís Internet technology we should be able to tell within 72-hours if a potential gun owner has a record.

Source: The America We Deserve, by Donald Trump, p.102 , Jul 2, 2000
cullennz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th November 2019, 10:45 PM   #63
Puppycow
Penultimate Amazing
 
Puppycow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 24,214
A couple of local news reports:

'A lot of unknowns' in an alleged racist incident at Buffalo Wild Wings in Naperville (Dupage Policy Journal, apparently a local newspaper from DuPage county. Naperville is in DuPage county, which is just west of Chicago, basically a suburb)

This story doesn't add a whole lot more, but they did manage to talk to "a source with first-hand knowledge" of the incident. According to the source, there is a video of the incident that hasn't been released yet.

Naperville police chief: No evidence of hate crime in Buffalo Wild Wings incident (Daily Herald, apparently another local newspaper)

They say the results of the police investigation may be released on Monday.

Quote:
Buffalo Wild Wings says the managers -- both women, one black, one white -- were fired after the company's internal investigation. Fuller said the host involved is a black man who quit his job the evening of the confrontation.
__________________
A fool thinks himself to be wise, but a wise man knows himself to be a fool.
William Shakespeare
Puppycow is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th November 2019, 10:48 PM   #64
Puppycow
Penultimate Amazing
 
Puppycow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 24,214
Originally Posted by cullennz View Post
Off topic, but what is a "waitron"?

Thought the first one was a spelling error and then it happened again.
If only there was some kind of way to find information like that on the internet.

Try typing waitron in the Google and see if you can find your answer.
__________________
A fool thinks himself to be wise, but a wise man knows himself to be a fool.
William Shakespeare
Puppycow is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th November 2019, 10:52 PM   #65
Thermal
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 8,852
Originally Posted by Puppycow View Post
I gotta side with smartcooky on this one.

Again, the company has claimed to have done a "thorough" internal investigation of the facts. Further, it's already been several days since the employees were fired (date of article above is Nov. 4th). I see no evidence of any public pushback against the company's response. Unless and until that happens, the narrative of the claimants remains unchallenged, and I disagree that the company would take this path if the facts they discovered in their internal investigation didn't support their claims.
Then your faith in Coprorate virtue is touching. Me, I think they 'thoroughly' ran a cost/benefit calculation and likely didn't give a rats ass what happened to the employees. They protected their shareholders interests.

Again, I don't trust lawyers insinuating a payoff is in the works, or a Corporation's PR spin and claims of impartial investigation, thorough or otherwise. I want to hear what the host and wait staff have to say for themselves before I would consider anything conclusive.

Eta: and the host, who is a primary accused, was not fired, but quit. Yeah, there's more to this that what we've seen thus far

Last edited by Thermal; 10th November 2019 at 10:54 PM.
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th November 2019, 10:58 PM   #66
cullennz
Embarrasingly illiterate
 
cullennz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,476
Originally Posted by Puppycow View Post
If only there was some kind of way to find information like that on the internet.

Try typing waitron in the Google and see if you can find your answer.
Like your thinking

It is a uber PC term for waitress and waiter so people don't think they come in different sexes even though you just have to look at the person to realise they are female or male, invented in the 80's
__________________
I generally oppose gun control, but I support the ban on assault weapons and I support a slightly longer waiting period to purchase a gun. With todayís Internet technology we should be able to tell within 72-hours if a potential gun owner has a record.

Source: The America We Deserve, by Donald Trump, p.102 , Jul 2, 2000
cullennz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th November 2019, 11:01 PM   #67
Puppycow
Penultimate Amazing
 
Puppycow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 24,214
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
Then your faith in Coprorate virtue is touching. Me, I think they 'thoroughly' ran a cost/benefit calculation and likely didn't give a rats ass what happened to the employees. They protected their shareholders interests.
Acting in the interests of their shareholders is precisely what I would expect, which is why I think they would push back strongly against the allegations if their internal investigations had found that they were false. I would expect the company to act in their own self interest, but what action in response that translates into depends on the results of the fact-finding. If they find that the allegations are true, you fire the employees, but if you find that they are false, you push back against the allegations and defend your employees.
__________________
A fool thinks himself to be wise, but a wise man knows himself to be a fool.
William Shakespeare
Puppycow is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th November 2019, 11:08 PM   #68
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 12,917
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
Regarding #2: meaningless.

NOT meaningless.

If person is accused of a crime or an offence, and they admit to having committed that crime or offence, then they DID commit that offence in every way that matters.
__________________
"You can't promote principled anti-corruption action without pissing-off corrupt people!" - George Kent on Day one of the Trump Impeachment Hearings
If you don't like my posts, my opinions, or my directness then put me on your ignore list.
This will be of benefit to both of us; you won't have to take umbrage at my posts, and I won't have to waste my time talking to you... simples! !
smartcooky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th November 2019, 11:15 PM   #69
Thermal
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 8,852
Originally Posted by Puppycow View Post
Acting in the interests of their shareholders is precisely what I would expect, which is why I think they would push back strongly against the allegations if their internal investigations had found that they were false. I would expect the company to act in their own self interest, but what action in response that translates into depends on the results of the fact-finding. If they find that the allegations are true, you fire the employees, but if you find that they are false, you push back against the allegations and defend your employees.
The current cultural climate does not tolerate push back against accusations of racism. Chipolte manager, remember? Right or wrong doesn't interest a corporation; profits and favorable press do. They can't win by fighting someone accusing them of racism. They can only lose to different degrees.
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th November 2019, 11:20 PM   #70
Thermal
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 8,852
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
NOT meaningless.

If person is accused of a crime or an offence, and they admit to having committed that crime or offence, then they DID commit that offence in every way that matters.
1) see 'no contest'. It's a very different concept than your substantial guilt interpretation

2) Buffalo Wild Wings wasn't accused of anything. A host and waitress were.

3) no one is in court yet, so this pseudo-legal phraseology is somewhat pointless.

I do hope the team had more fun at Hooters, though.
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th November 2019, 12:52 AM   #71
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 12,917
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
1) see 'no contest'. It's a very different concept than your substantial guilt interpretation
I said nothing about guilt. I said "they DID commit that offence"

Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
2) Buffalo Wild Wings wasn't accused of anything.
Yes they were.

The buck stops with the employer. The employer is ultimately responsible for the way their employees treat the customers.

Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
3) no one is in court yet, so this pseudo-legal phraseology is somewhat pointless.

__________________
"You can't promote principled anti-corruption action without pissing-off corrupt people!" - George Kent on Day one of the Trump Impeachment Hearings
If you don't like my posts, my opinions, or my directness then put me on your ignore list.
This will be of benefit to both of us; you won't have to take umbrage at my posts, and I won't have to waste my time talking to you... simples! !
smartcooky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th November 2019, 01:04 AM   #72
DevilsAdvocate
Philosopher
 
DevilsAdvocate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 5,301
When I first heard the story, I thought it sounded fishy. Not only because the alleged racism was so outrageous, but because the action of the people involved didn't make sense.

Why would the restaurant be so blatant as to ask the race of the party and actually tell them that they are going to be treated differently because they have a racist customer? If the restaurant is going to be racist and treat black people differently, they would just see if the people are black and then treat them differently without actually telling them. And if they knew that the party had black people and should not be sat next to the racist customer, why did they end up sitting them next to the racist customer when they could have sat them somewhere else?

These things don’t seem to make sense. But I’ve read the Facebook account and listened to the press conference. They give a lot of details. They seem honest and genuine.

I think the key is that the manager was accommodating the racist, but black host and the waitress and other staff were aware of what was going on and were against it.

It sounds like the host was told by the manager that if those are bunch of black people coming in, they shouldn’t be sat next to the racist. The host is black. He was against this. But he decided not to confront the manager directly. He took a different approach: OK, if we are going to be a racist restaurant, then let’s just be openly and blatantly racist.

So, the host asks what race they are, knowing that is an obviously racist question. And flat out tells them that they are going to be seated differently because of their race because they have a racist customer. He’s letting the customers know what is going on. And if they still want to sit at that table, why not? He knows the manager doesn’t want then to be seated there, but let the manager explain to this group of black people that they can’t sit there because of their race.

The reason the story does not at first make sense is because some of the employees, especially the host, were acting in a nonsensical manner to passive aggressively expose and sabotage the racism that was occurring with the customer and manager.
__________________
"Glass slippers don't come in half sizes." - Rachael Smith
DevilsAdvocate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th November 2019, 01:42 AM   #73
Wudang
BOFH
 
Wudang's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: People's Republic of South Yorkshire
Posts: 12,162
Originally Posted by abaddon View Post

OK, Let's examine the EXIF data of that image...Wheeeee, it has none.
Oh, has facebook stopped stripping EXIF data from uploaded photos then? I hadn't heard.
__________________
"Your deepest pools, like your deepest politicians and philosophers, often turn out more shallow than expected." Walter Scott.
Wudang is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th November 2019, 01:48 AM   #74
Wudang
BOFH
 
Wudang's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: People's Republic of South Yorkshire
Posts: 12,162
Originally Posted by cullennz View Post
Like your thinking

It is a uber PC term for waitress and waiter so people don't think they come in different sexes even though you just have to look at the person to realise they are female or male, invented in the 80's
The places I frequented on the internet in the 80's it was always used a little disparagingly. See for example Merriam-Webster

Quote:
The word is probably a blend of "waiter/waitress" and "-tron," a suffix that seems to allude to the machinelike impersonality of waiting tables.
__________________
"Your deepest pools, like your deepest politicians and philosophers, often turn out more shallow than expected." Walter Scott.
Wudang is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th November 2019, 02:05 AM   #75
cullennz
Embarrasingly illiterate
 
cullennz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,476
Originally Posted by DevilsAdvocate View Post
When I first heard the story, I thought it sounded fishy. Not only because the alleged racism was so outrageous, but because the action of the people involved didn't make sense.

Why would the restaurant be so blatant as to ask the race of the party and actually tell them that they are going to be treated differently because they have a racist customer? If the restaurant is going to be racist and treat black people differently, they would just see if the people are black and then treat them differently without actually telling them. And if they knew that the party had black people and should not be sat next to the racist customer, why did they end up sitting them next to the racist customer when they could have sat them somewhere else?

These things donít seem to make sense. But Iíve read the Facebook account and listened to the press conference. They give a lot of details. They seem honest and genuine.

I think the key is that the manager was accommodating the racist, but black host and the waitress and other staff were aware of what was going on and were against it.

It sounds like the host was told by the manager that if those are bunch of black people coming in, they shouldnít be sat next to the racist. The host is black. He was against this. But he decided not to confront the manager directly. He took a different approach: OK, if we are going to be a racist restaurant, then letís just be openly and blatantly racist.

So, the host asks what race they are, knowing that is an obviously racist question. And flat out tells them that they are going to be seated differently because of their race because they have a racist customer. Heís letting the customers know what is going on. And if they still want to sit at that table, why not? He knows the manager doesnít want then to be seated there, but let the manager explain to this group of black people that they canít sit there because of their race.

The reason the story does not at first make sense is because some of the employees, especially the host, were acting in a nonsensical manner to passive aggressively expose and sabotage the racism that was occurring with the customer and manager.
Either that or they just aren't nice people, didn't care and just followed the rules.
__________________
I generally oppose gun control, but I support the ban on assault weapons and I support a slightly longer waiting period to purchase a gun. With todayís Internet technology we should be able to tell within 72-hours if a potential gun owner has a record.

Source: The America We Deserve, by Donald Trump, p.102 , Jul 2, 2000
cullennz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th November 2019, 02:06 AM   #76
Puppycow
Penultimate Amazing
 
Puppycow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 24,214
Originally Posted by Wudang View Post
The places I frequented on the internet in the 80's it was always used a little disparagingly. See for example Merriam-Webster
Not to get all PC, but may I suggest that "waiter" could be a gender-neutral term?

I believe that the term "actress" has fallen out of favor to describe a female actor and now the preferred usage is just "actor" whether male of female. The same logic could be applied to waiter/waitress rather than something weird like "waitron".

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/-ess

Quote:
This suffix tends to be regarded as sexist and as such is starting to fall into disuse; a single, gender-neutral term is preferred by some even though it is a less specific term.

Glenda Jackson is a famous actor.
Glenda Jackson is a famous actress. More specific language signaling that Glenda is a female.
__________________
A fool thinks himself to be wise, but a wise man knows himself to be a fool.
William Shakespeare
Puppycow is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th November 2019, 02:11 AM   #77
cullennz
Embarrasingly illiterate
 
cullennz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,476
Originally Posted by Puppycow View Post
Not to get all PC, but may I suggest that "waiter" could be a gender-neutral term?

I believe that the term "actress" has fallen out of favor to describe a female actor and now the preferred usage is just "actor" whether male of female. The same logic could be applied to waiter/waitress rather than something weird like "waitron".

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/-ess
Indeed

"So Sandra Bullock....Keanu Reeves....Your new film is out. Looks great!!! ... How did it affect you as Actrons?"
__________________
I generally oppose gun control, but I support the ban on assault weapons and I support a slightly longer waiting period to purchase a gun. With todayís Internet technology we should be able to tell within 72-hours if a potential gun owner has a record.

Source: The America We Deserve, by Donald Trump, p.102 , Jul 2, 2000
cullennz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th November 2019, 02:17 AM   #78
Information Analyst
Penultimate Amazing
 
Information Analyst's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Besźel or Ul Qoma - not sure...
Posts: 10,035
Originally Posted by Puppycow View Post
This is apparently more than just "one side of the story" because the company did an investigation and apparently found that there were in fact grounds for firing the employees and banning the customer. I don't really see any compelling grounds at this points to reach a different conclusion.
I think one can easily play Devil's Advocate on that score, given how easy it seems to be to fire staff in parts (most?) of the US. In the UK, even on the evidence we have, the employees could take it to a tribunal, and might still win if they can put a different slant on it, or if the company's disciplinary processes were bypassed.

Last edited by Information Analyst; 11th November 2019 at 02:26 AM.
Information Analyst is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th November 2019, 02:42 AM   #79
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 12,917
Originally Posted by DevilsAdvocate View Post
When I first heard the story, I thought it sounded fishy. Not only because the alleged racism was so outrageous, but because the action of the people involved didn't make sense.

Why would the restaurant be so blatant as to ask the race of the party and actually tell them that they are going to be treated differently because they have a racist customer? If the restaurant is going to be racist and treat black people differently, they would just see if the people are black and then treat them differently without actually telling them. And if they knew that the party had black people and should not be sat next to the racist customer, why did they end up sitting them next to the racist customer when they could have sat them somewhere else?

These things donít seem to make sense. But Iíve read the Facebook account and listened to the press conference. They give a lot of details. They seem honest and genuine.

I think the key is that the manager was accommodating the racist, but black host and the waitress and other staff were aware of what was going on and were against it.

It sounds like the host was told by the manager that if those are bunch of black people coming in, they shouldnít be sat next to the racist. The host is black. He was against this. But he decided not to confront the manager directly. He took a different approach: OK, if we are going to be a racist restaurant, then letís just be openly and blatantly racist.

So, the host asks what race they are, knowing that is an obviously racist question. And flat out tells them that they are going to be seated differently because of their race because they have a racist customer. Heís letting the customers know what is going on. And if they still want to sit at that table, why not? He knows the manager doesnít want then to be seated there, but let the manager explain to this group of black people that they canít sit there because of their race.

The reason the story does not at first make sense is because some of the employees, especially the host, were acting in a nonsensical manner to passive aggressively expose and sabotage the racism that was occurring with the customer and manager.


This is about the best analysis I have seen so far

Of course, it won't be shifting any whitey opinions anytime soon.
__________________
"You can't promote principled anti-corruption action without pissing-off corrupt people!" - George Kent on Day one of the Trump Impeachment Hearings
If you don't like my posts, my opinions, or my directness then put me on your ignore list.
This will be of benefit to both of us; you won't have to take umbrage at my posts, and I won't have to waste my time talking to you... simples! !
smartcooky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th November 2019, 05:35 AM   #80
SuburbanTurkey
Master Poster
 
SuburbanTurkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: Boston, USA
Posts: 2,299
Originally Posted by Puppycow View Post
A couple of local news reports:

'A lot of unknowns' in an alleged racist incident at Buffalo Wild Wings in Naperville (Dupage Policy Journal, apparently a local newspaper from DuPage county. Naperville is in DuPage county, which is just west of Chicago, basically a suburb)

This story doesn't add a whole lot more, but they did manage to talk to "a source with first-hand knowledge" of the incident. According to the source, there is a video of the incident that hasn't been released yet.

Naperville police chief: No evidence of hate crime in Buffalo Wild Wings incident (Daily Herald, apparently another local newspaper)

They say the results of the police investigation may be released on Monday.
Not sure what point these articles are trying to make. Violating public accommodations law is never a "hate crime". It's a violation of federal law that can result in the federal government (or state government, if relevant state law exists) suing the establishment. No one gets arrested for this, so the sheriff's comment is pretty much worthless. There was no act of violence, so obviously there was no hate crime. A manager enforcing an explicitly racist seating policy is not a hate crime.

The company has not contested the group's version of events. The fired employees have not denied the story as given. No one is defending this action. Other employees have quit in protest. Sure, it is possible that this story could be a hoax, but the preponderance of evidence is heavily against it. Testimony is evidence, and you have over a dozen people saying the same thing and nothing but silence from the alleged bad actors.

What do the doubters expect here? Unless there is a lawsuit against the restaurant, this is probably as good as the information is going to get. I'm sure if there were a lawsuit, some of the very same people doubting the story would impugn the motives as overly litigious.

I am deeply suspicious by those paralyzed by unreasonable indecision when it comes to acknowledging racism for what it is.
__________________
Gobble gobble

Last edited by SuburbanTurkey; 11th November 2019 at 05:53 AM.
SuburbanTurkey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:50 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.