If they were given out incorrectly..?
Incorrectly? ...an error made at the time? ... or that has come to light via subsequent events?
Is there a specific happening that is a reliable basis for extrapolation?
Any time an award/honor is awarded under false pretense no matter the timing of discovery of said false pretense all awards should be null and void. I believe an Highsman trophy was recalled from a certain athlete and Tour de France awards were recalled. So there is precedence.
Al, you need to focus the question. That’s way too general. It calls for a broad conclusion that does not take circumstance into consideration, or even define “incorrectly.” I offer you the equally nebulous lawyer’s answer—It depends….
quote:
Originally posted by OwenIncorrectly? ...an error made at the time? ... or that has come to light via subsequent events?
Is there a specific happening that is a reliable basis for extrapolation?
I'm thinkin ..
News Reporters that got it wrong.
quote:
Originally posted by Bill RogersAl, you need to focus the question. That’s way too general. It calls for a broad conclusion that does not take circumstance into consideration, or even define “incorrectly.” I offer you the equally nebulous lawyer’s answer—It depends….
Best word i could come up with at that time..
It has happened: The case of Janet Cooke
Yes..but that was a fabrication..
What it the recipiant was..just plain wrong..or found to be incorrect..?
Al, does The New York Times have anything to do with the OP?
Not specifictly..
But they'er as likely a candidate as any..
quote:
Originally posted by 5B-RanchAny time an award/honor is awarded under false pretense no matter the timing of discovery of said false pretense all awards should be null and void. I believe an Highsman trophy was recalled from a certain athlete and Tour de France awards were recalled. So there is precedence.
As were Olympic medals. Jim Thorpe ring a bell?
quote:
Originally posted by Bill RogersAl, you need to focus the question. That’s way too general. It calls for a broad conclusion that does not take circumstance into consideration, or even define “incorrectly.”
Common occurrence in these threads...
Difficult to tell whether the OP is running a social experiment, or wants a discussion.
Edited by - OldNavyGuy on 01/31/2023 16:26:05
Al, my questioning has me recalling how I would sometimes play "Twenty Questions" with some of my students in an effort to show them how a logical (?) approach was better than simply guessing.
Anyhoo, to sorta answer your question, as a general principle, it's never* a bad idea to try to right a wrong.... or make amends, or .... ???
* = says a guy who has posted "never say never" on more than one occasion.
Another vague question. Unless we have a specific case then there's no point in dealing with hypotheticals. As it's so vague I'm going to put two and two together and make five. Perhaps the person claiming the story is wrong is wrong. Perhaps they are claiming this because they don't like the story. Because it doesn't fit in with whatever view they have.
I'm assuming this is referring to the music and poetry prizes. it's a private organisation run from Columbia University. So maybe you should be asking them.
People who claim to be so smart..
Sure have a hard time thinking outside the box..
Almost to the point of ..having ..hissy fits..
If they are asked to..
Programmed thinking is the ..only acceptable..thinking..?
It is outside thinking..that brings ..out a bunch of new disscoverys...
But if you choose to be..limmited to..
Only spiciffics...
Well..
Have at it..
But..just go on an outrage tangent..
Kinda like ya do..
quote:
Originally posted by AndrewDI'm assuming this is referring to the music and poetry prizes. it's a private organisation run from Columbia University. So maybe you should be asking them.
No Andy....
It could be annah subject..
If a prize is given..
N..later it is found out that..
The recipyant was wrong....
Example...
We gave you an award for your reporting....the story you have covered..
N..foud that all your reporting was incorrect....
Should that award..be revoked..?
Could be Nobel prizes too..for that matter..
It depends upon what I think of the recipient of the prize.
quote:
Originally posted by RB3It depends upon what I think of the recipient of the prize.
Personaly..that to me would be a caritor judgement
.
Not really aplicable..imo..
If the story is found false..regaurdless of who the writer is..
It was the info..that actually won the prize..
Or the exacutoin..of the fact findings...that won the prize..
Regaurdless of who the wrighter is..
If the story is true..then the prize is warrented..
If it is found false.. or is rectacted..for being false..
Should the prize be revoked..?
Edited by - STUD figmo Al on 02/01/2023 06:38:04
Graham: " .... there's no point in dealing with hypotheticals."
I dunno about that. I've acknowledged that sometimes I'm the odd man out, but I like to wonder about things.... I wonder what would happen if? ... I wonder why somebody-or-other is doing something one way when there are obviously* better options? etc., etc.
Having said that, generally I prefer to know upfront whether or not it's an actual or hypothetical issue.... even if/when I figure "well if such-and-such applies in that situation, should it also apply in this situation?" is in the offing.
* = eg. I wondered why the operator of the yocal Zamboni followed a particular [inefficient] pattern around the ice surface. So I asked. His explanation was as convoluted [i.e. highly "questionable" rationale] as was the pattern. C'est la vie???
Edit: My interpretation of Wayne's comment ^^ is, "A principle is a principle until it isn't." [And in the interest of disclosure I've been known to selectively apply some rules. .... i.e. sometimes there's a teensy-weensy slice of gray between the black-white.]
Edited by - Owen on 02/01/2023 06:51:35
If an article is written in good faith, and the persons interviewed as sources have been vetted, the prize should stand. Even if later it is found that one of the persons interviewed lied.
If, on the other hand, the persons interviewed are fictitious and made up by the author, the prize should be publicly revoked.
I remember a story some years ago about someone winning a Pulitzer, or similar award, for a story about a child. The child did not exist, and the author later claimed the child in the story was a composite of many children. If this were clear in the article, the prize should stand, but it was not, and the prize was rightfully revoked.
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Th...%20rules.
Had to look him up..
As i did not know of him..
But it dose apply to the subject..
Thankyou DC5...
quote:
Originally posted by STUDen.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Th...%20rules.
Had to look him up..
As i did not know of him..
But it dose apply to the subject..
Thankyou DC5...
"Ignorance of the law is no excuse."
quote:
Originally posted by Paul R
"Ignorance of the law is no excuse."
However, it can be a defense...
quote:
Originally posted by STUD
I'm thinkin ..News Reporters that got it wrong.
What news reporters won a Pulitzer for what they got wrong? Name the reporters and the award-winning work.
If you can't, what's the point of the question?
quote:
Originally posted by Old Hickoryquote:
Originally posted by STUD
I'm thinkin ..News Reporters that got it wrong.
What news reporters won a Pulitzer for what they got wrong? Name the reporters and the award-winning work.
If you can't, what's the point of the question?
Oh I'm pretty sure he can and it would make it more legit if those questioning STUD's OP would do a little research.
