Team 900 scandal, postscript

[charlieb]

I asked the administrator to remove the original post on this subject because I was threatened with legal action by the family of the team member mentioned. (The post has been “unlisted”.) I don’t really think I am at risk, but I think most of the good discussion happened yesterday so I’m happy to accede to the family’s wishes. I mention this only to explain why the post is no longer listed.

The main points I took away from the discussions were;

• There is broad consensus that the FIRST YPP is designed primarily to protect the organization from litigation. There was a lot of distrust expressed in the ability of the YPP to protect victimized youths, and strong skepticism that the YPP is able to protect innocent mentors. There were calls for FIRST to devote energy to investigating and fixing these problems, but not much hope that it will.

• There were many testimonials in support of the mentors who were banned from FIRST. It’s clear that these mentors were leading the way in the practice of FIRST principles, especially inclusiveness and fairness. Investigation conducted by the host school found no issues with their conduct, and upon appeal, FIRST reduced the duration of the ban from three years to one. I speculate that FIRST also found no fault with the mentor’s conduct, but wanted to allow the accusing student to graduate and leave before the mentor’s return.

If FIRST values these three mentors, and if they understand the tremendous benefits to the generations of students that these mentors may yet serve, then FIRST should humbly apologize and fully exonerate them.

For the organization’s own benefit, FIRST should take a hard look at the YPP, find out how students and mentors feel about the protection it provides, or conversely, the risks it may present, and take actions to ensure that the program serves the needs of the FIRST community.

[jlr]

being threatened with legal action and then consequently mentioning that in a subsequent post is an interesting choice…

[sokoloff]

When good people stay quiet in the face of injustice or wrongdoing, it allows evil to prevail.

If they factually threatened legal action and OP factually reports that, I think a good and appropriate deed has been done.

The whole situation stinks, but if everyone lets people get their way via threatening behavior, I think we get more, not less of that behavior.

[charlieb]

As I said, I mention that only to explain the absence of the original post. I hope this thread will remain focused on the subjects of the three Team 900 mentors and the YPP in general.

[sokoloff]

With that focus in mind, I don’t see how YPP would help or hurt gender discrimination claims, which seemed to be the crux of the original complaint.

Is YPP iron-clad? No!
Does YPP help? Probably/close to certainly.
Does YPP help guide me (as a non-predatory mentor) in interactions to make it less likely that I will either be credibly accused or help create an environment to allow a predatory mentor to act upon their desires? I think it does.

I’m an engineer and no expert on youth protection, but it seems like YPP is way better than nothing, so we’re arguing towards perfect rather than good (and, as above, I can’t see how it could affect a gender discrimination claim).

[Doug_Frisk]

@charlieb

I don’t really think I am at risk

When you find yourself in a hole, the first thing to do is to stop digging.

You’re clearly upset, but I do not think you understand the gravity of what you’ve done and are doing.

[Thad_House]

I really really hope the reason it’s a year wasn’t just to let the student graduate. That is an absolutely asinine reaction. Ruin one of your mentors that you have profiled in the past for a single student…. If there was no evidence, ban the student for filing a false report for that year instead.

[dmhl]

You know you can take a break, right? I’m not sure if creating another thread right after the other one was removed and you received threats of litigation is the best move. Making another post so soon when emotions are high will not change what happened to the 900 mentors who were YPPed.

[charlieb]

Thanks for your concern. I’m done. I just wanted to capture and condense all the great conversations from yesterday. I don’t hold a lot of hope that these posts will do anything to help Team 900 or the FIRST community, but I had to try.

[nuttle]

Legal action should generally be a last resort, for a number of reasons. But the threat of legal action is too often one of the first resorts and can be quite effective. In this case, the legal action would presumably be about defamation – which could be quite ironic if the facts happened to line up in a certain way.

A legal proceeding around the original complaint is kind of an interesting thought experiment though. One thing that could ensue, in this hypothesized (and unlikely) scenario, would be a chance to air the whole thing and present evidence in a forum set up to handle disputes and operating under well-established rules, designed to help reach an accurate conclusion while protecting the rights of all involved. This should be the ideal, at any rate.

This would involve time and expense, and there is always some risk – all of this on both sides. Truth is generally a very strong cause – or defense, but this can be naïve. Maybe there would be some catharsis, or perhaps a form of exoneration. Of course, this is usually not a path anyone chooses to walk. And, with a minor, there’s a whole other layer of issues.

The thing is, it’s possible for there to be multiple “truths”, especially when subjective experience is at the center of things. Was anyone excluded from the team? Perhaps a student was paid less than similarly situated peers or passed over for promotion which was clearly merited? Or, there’s is a clear pattern, existing across time and adversely affecting multiple individuals? Maybe a title IX violation of some kind occurred?

If not, it becomes about perceived injustice, determining exactly what transpired, and – crucially – about the attribution of motive. This is where two parties can be sure they are both right. Sometimes, both parties can be filled with, and even blinded by, a righteous anger. Or, one party is in such a place and the other chooses to – or is intimidated into – remaining silent. Other processes are meant to be less traumatic, or more efficient, or to serve some other desirable end. But this is not always how things go. And, if they get things less right, there are real costs which can be very high.

Emotion often leads different parties different places. Objective facts tend to anchor things and bring the parties together. It’s impossible (and ill-advised) to say more, but it can and does happen that the objective facts don’t support the findings. In this case, I do not know what transpired or even what was alleged, and so I must acknowledge that either party could be totally right, totally wrong, or some mix of the two.

Again, I really do hope things work out as well as they can for all involved – including for current and future students on team 900.

[Andrew_Schreiber]

And of course NC is one of the 17 states without anti-SLAPP laws on the books…

[gerthworm]

@nuttle

Perhaps a student was paid less than similarly situated peers

who the fork is paying their students?

[nuttle]

That was kind of the point.

[gerthworm]

Lol.

I mean, the others are more reasonable to happen in some capacity, that was the one that jumped out at me as odd.

I did legitimately laugh though.

[Tom_Line]

If you were truly threatened with legal action, that tells me all I need to know about the family and the individual involved. The Streisand effect is a thing.

I also abhor the idea that everything should be kept secret. If the issue is valid, it will survive the light of day (as long as the name of minors is removed).

Post the cease and desist for giggles if that is what was sent.

[bobbysq]

I think now is a good time to remind any mentors looking to discuss similar topics that the CD Mentor Forum exists, and can serve as a more private area to talk with trusted individuals about sensitive topics.

As a reminder, anyone in the group looking to nominate a fellow mentor may do so by following the instructions in this thread.

[pabeekm]

It feels like this thread is going in a really nasty direction. I would discourage anyone from speculating too much about the student.

[cadandcookies]

@Tom_Line

If you were truly threatened with legal action, that tells me all I need to know about the family and the individual involved. The Streisand effect is a thing.

This you?

Because that looks an awful lot to me like you leaping to immediately suggesting legal action based on a CD post from a clearly one-sided source. Given that folks like you, who seem to leap to immediately suggesting legal action, exist, why is it unreasonable that someone like you might also be on the currently unseen side of this?

As an aside to other participants, I would like to remind folks that we don’t have independent confirmation of anything related to this entire situation, and acting on the assumption that everyone involved is being fully forthright is not necessarily a reasonable approach.

[Tom_Line]

I think you may be miscontruing or misunderstanding my post.

Post 1
This post, on the other thread, was pointing out to the initial poster that posting here on Chief Delphi was unlikely to move the needle with FIRST, and that if they actually wanted them to sit up and take notice the only real recourse would be a legal one. However, that fight would likely need to come from one of the three people who were removed.

Post 2
This post, on this thread, is mocking the idea that lawyers can simply shut people up by acting all big and scary. If the initial individual was speaking what they believed to be true, then there is no legal recourse to stop them from talking. I abhor lawyers using their profession to attempt to squelch legal free speech. All too often they use the threat of litigation, because it’s free for THEM and very expensive for the person they are going after. They even have laws specifically against it, but it still happens all the time.

Please note, in both cases, I made it clear that names should not be included if the individual is a minor.