Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I guess you're just playing semantics, and I can understand that. What else is there to do when an issue is so obviously ridiculous.
So yes, the judge literally said that "the test is discriminatory...". Wow, how profound this man is. We are here telling you that he, nor anyone, has ever explained how. All he has to go on is that more white people scored better. Now again, I'll give you another crack at guessing why that may be. I see that you and Sobro are ducking that challenge.
Thank you, finally someone concedes.
How the test is it discriminatory, why people have not scored as high now, is none of my concern in this thread.
I'm addressing facts here, not conjectures; namely SIB's initial belief that the judge didn't say the test was discriminatory.
What I think of the test or you think of the test is completely irrelevant. What the judge thinks is what matters.
you belived the judge didn't say in his veridict that the examination was discriminatory. I gave you a direct quote, but you're not grown up enough (or man enough perhaps) to concede that you were mistaken.
all you can do now is deflect and twist words to make yourself believe you knew the facts of the matter. you don't. you were proven wrong... It's time to man up now.
But what do you think of the "justice" that was served as a result of the judge's ruling?
Brand new test. Complaining group, Vulcans, helped to create such test.
Statistical results of test: same.
Obviously the judge's ruling failed somewhere along the line.
I'm not speculating why they are having the same results. I don't know enough about how the hiring process works, how the test is given, and many other factors that might play a role in hiring people for the FDNY.
Again, I was just addressing the judge's veridict.
How the test is it discriminatory, why people have not scored as high now, is none of my concern in this thread.
I'm addressing facts here, not conjectures; namely SIB's initial belief that the judge didn't say the test was discriminatory.
now carry on folks.
Quote:
Originally Posted by likeminas
I'm not speculating why they are having the same results. I don't know enough about how the hiring process works, how the test is given, and many other factors that might play in hiring people for the FDNY.
Again, I was just addressing the judge's veridict.
I'll leave the conjectures to you guys.
Lol so the only the thing of your concern are some random sounds that one "judge" makes out of his mouth that have nothing to back them up? You have no interest in discussing/addressing the various issues surrounding this nonsense that a good few of us are bringing up to you?
I have to say, that's odd and tells me that you don't care about facts as long as the outcome is as liberal in nature as you need it to be.
Did you read even a few questions from the "discriminatory" test that I linked?
What I think of the test or you think of the test is completely irrelevant. What the judge thinks is what matters.
I'm sure your opinions on a wide variety of topics are not only irelevant, but misinformed and void of any reason or common sense. But I was giving you an opportunity to give your take on the test...just to see if you had anything interesting to say on the topic.
Quote:
you belived the judge didn't say in his veridict that the examination was discriminatory. I gave you a direct quote, but you're not grown up enough (or man enough perhaps) to concede that you were mistaken.
all you can do now is deflect and twist words to make yourself believe you knew the facts of the matter. you don't. you were proven wrong... It's time to man up now.
I concede you misunderstood my initial point, and every point I've made since (as well as those made by other posters). It can't be dumbed down any further.
Lol so the only the thing of your concern are some random sounds that one "judge" makes out of his mouth that have nothing to back them up? You have no interest in discussing/addressing the various issues surrounding this nonsense that a good few of us are bringing up to you?
I have to say, that's odd and tells me that you don't care about facts as long as the outcome is as liberal in nature as you need it to be.
Did you read even a few questions from the "discriminatory" test that I linked?
I really don't care if the judge is liberal or conservative. I only care about the final outcome of a lawsuit. We might agree or disagree with the judge's decision on the issue, but ultimately his verdict is what matters here.
I won't speculate on why people are scoring at the same rates, I openly admit I don't know enough about the hiring process to make an informed assessment.
I just took on the task of correcting dimwits like SIB who were under the assumption that the judge didn't say in his verdict the examination was discriminatory. Wether the test is in fact discriminatory I don't know. What I know is what the judge said.
I really don't care if the judge is liberal or conservative. I only care about the final outcome of a lawsuit. We might agree or disagree with the judge's decision on the issue, but ultimately his verdict is what matters here.
I won't speculate on why people are scoring at the same rates, I openly admit I don't enough about the hiring process to make an informed assessment. I just took on the task of correcting dimwits like SIB who were under the assumption that the judge didn't say in his verdict the examination was discriminatory. Wether the test is in fact discriminatory I don't know. What I know is what the judge said.
Oh, I see.
So you were posting because you wanted to have (and "win") a personal argument with another poster regarding some detail he wrote, not to actually discuss the topic at hand, which you actually know little about and couldn't care less about.
So you were posting because you wanted to have (and "win") a personal argument with another poster regarding some detail he wrote, not to actually discuss the topic at hand, which you actually know little about and couldn't care less about.
Come on, you can do better than that!
Correcting a misinformed assumption is discussing in my book.
Do I care to speculate on why the FDNY is disproportionately white in a city where whites are not a majority? Not really...
Like I said I'll leave that to you guys.
Please do present your theories and hypothesis of this phenomenon. It's very amusing I must say.
Correcting a misinformed assumption is discussing in my book.
Do I care to speculate on why the FDNY is disproportionately white in a city where whites are not a majority? Not really...
Like I said I'll leave that to you guys.
Please do present your theories and hypothesis of this phenomenon. It's very amusing I must say.
Its definitely disciminatory. Its too hard for some people to pass. Perhaps its because its in English.
Quote:
Originally Posted by I_Love_LI_but
Glad to see you're easily amused!
Some of the preposterous and racially motivated theories are in fact very entertaining.
No need to read online jokes when I can read what you guys write.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
