Holding Sexist Members Accountable

Exactly. More than one attorney has told me that basically there is no such thing as making yourself suit-proof because anyone can make a case of anything. And to reiterate, you may win in the end but be emotionally and financially drained with no hope of recovering the costs and awards from your victory. Scenario two is you end up paying a settlement to the person suing you without admitting guilt because you don't want to be put through the wringer anymore.

 

Someone tried something similar last year. They emailed the president, provost, chair, and other people because I told them to f*** off on LinkedIn. Mind you, this was someone who was antagonizing me in my inbox. Typical of people to act like they are the victim. Anyway, it didn't work out in their favor because a month and a half later I was offered a renewal of my contract, which I declined. After five years of law enforcement, I have enough resources to beat people at their own game.

 

We live in such a whinny, litigious society where being a victim is a badge of honor. Sounds like whoever the person was just needed to "man or woman up". To go behind your back like that after instigating is what my military friends call a "Blue Falcon". Glad it didn't work out.

 

I thought you had said your piece?

Yeah, my advice is get D&O insurance when an exec and an umbrella coverage on your home insurance that covers defamation/slander/libel.

 

Which is why you have insurance

 

What I said (posted on this board) wasn't all that bad. The suit was baseless. I not only won, I won an anti-SLAPP judgment against the plaintiff to recover my costs and fees. But the court gave the plaintiff many bites of the apple before shutting it down and giving me my motion. I'd rather not do it again. What the poster to whom I responded doesn't realize is the truth--or being absolutely right--doesn't shield one from being sued and all the attendant hassles and costs. I used the term tortious interference, but that doesn't have to be the claim. It can be a number of things. And none of them have to be right or fair, and I think that's what the poster missed. Even when you win, you lose.

 

I think that's my call, not yours. But thank you for your input.

 

Indeed. There's a phrase some police officers (and those in contact with them) use: You can beat the rap, but you can't beat the ride. Meaning even if you're innocent, you can be arrested, fingerprinted, spend the night (or longer) in jail, and so on. A similar concept applies to lawsuits. No matter how frivolous, in most jurisdictions anyone can sue anyone for any other reason, and it is incumbent upon them to defend themselves and seek dismissal. Some states have better protections than others, but it is still stressful and often expensive.

 

Brilliant.

 

And, now you're the one doing the antagonizing.

 

That's funny because Chris got whiny simply because I said that no one wants to live in Texarkana, which is a small city with a declining population. Ironically, he turned down a job in Texarkana because he doesn't want to live there. Considering that my comment had nothing to do with him, why were his feelings hurt, and why did he throw a tantrum?

 

Yeah, filing a lawsuit over tortious interference because of something you said publicly would be frivolous.

 

…. I still don’t understand what this is about.
Apparently it must be over my head.

 

Let's look at Chris getting an attitude with Kizmet because she gave him a verbal warning, which is all he ever gets...repeatedly.

https://www.degreeinfo.com/index.php?threads/what-is-the-supposed-problem-with-the-msm-l.56349/page-3#post-528214

On this page, he basically admits to being intentionally childish and comes off as being jealous because I actually know what I'm talking about.

https://www.degreeinfo.com/index.php?threads/what-is-the-supposed-problem-with-the-msm-l.56349/page-2

 

I did NOT turn down a job there. You need to read with comprehension. I said I did not apply because I wouldn't live there. This was true of other positions, some I applied to and withdrew my application because they were places I wouldn't want to live. However, you said that no one wants to live there. Even if 36k isn't a lot, it still means there are people who want to live there. My feelings were not hurt. I only made the point that you were jealous because I cannot see why you would downplay the man's achievement by saying no one wants to live in the city where he earned tenure. You act like you are this saint on this forum but you are snarky and condescending. Even when you supposedly congratulated me on my TT position at UVI, you preface it with a similar comment (the degree got me a position at an unranked school).

 

Yea, keep digging up posts from 3 years ago. Be sure to find the ones where I made sexist comments towards you. I'm still waiting!

Me jealous? Laughable! Anyway, this is my last comment on this thread.

 

LOL. You're probably the only English speaker on the planet who would take "no one wants to live there" literally. Obviously, the idiom means that the city has a hard time with attracting people.