cleardirect
Veteran
- May 24, 2008
- 6,234
- 9,749
- Banned
- #10,051
Let's review. At the arbitration both sides had people in the room. Both sides brought under oath testimony in front of a neutral third party. A list was decided.Here comes the integrity thing. I look at it this way, when someone is reaching into someone elses pocket to take what they didn't earn, and the thief doesn't like the outcome, the thief is the first to cry foul. This is a classic case of the thief being caught red handed, and crying lack of integrity. Give us a break! Why don't you earn your position, rather than jump on someone's back. Your situational ethics are very telling.
usapa in a closed room with only one side decided on your own what that list should be.
You need to rethink your definition of stealing. Who is trying to steal from whom?
Yes situational ethics are showing.