Strong Content - Well, This Probably Explains His Resignation From The Aprl...

Don - your approach is right. I don't see any argument for preventing the provision of information to readers.

I agree with Don. The information posted is factual and relevant. If some find it distasteful, there's always the back button.

Given that Mr Zwillinger is innocent until a Court decides otherwise this is purely tabloid fodder. The very nature of the charges even if dismissed will forever taint Mr Zwillinger.

How public is public information? Interesting question since I believe that one needs a case number in order to pull those records up. How would an average curious citizen go about exposing any one individuals records if they need such a number? Seems like a chicken or the egg proposition.

The larger point is that I fail to see a direct connection between these accusations and the APS and/or philately.

APS has a code of ethics that extends beyond philately behavior so a person charged with any major crime is automatically suspended until the conclusion. The public notice of the suspension is what started people looking for why.

rogdcam,
We allowed a 28 page Kols thread and no one said that we should censor that. So the guideline is that we should only allow threads with felonies that only directly pertain to stamp collecting? I assume that folks want to know if they are associating with unethical people no matter the nature of the behavior. Frankly this feels a lot like we are applying a double standard here. People here accused David Kols of being a thief without any proof, conviction, or even any charges being brought against him. The Kols situation was (at best) a civil legal action, this is criminal. In this case, law enforcement and the DA feels there is enough evidence to bring charges.

We are being consistent by not censoring this thread.
Don

The suspension of Mr. Zwillinger and of any member is sad news. All the APS need to do in fairness to all parties envolved is cite its code section behind the suspension NOT the details of any serious offense under litigation. But that is where the news needs to stop until any legal action is concluded.

His resignation should be reported as just that. May or may not be solely related to the suspension.

My concern is regardless of the circumstances we are turning our discussions into tabloid journalism. This sells better than most modern stamps.

Mr Zwillinger is not "unethical" until proven guilty at which point he is far worse. I just have a personal problem with the court of public opinion which is oftentimes wrong in the end. As far as Kols goes, there was no doubt that people were indeed ripped off. Whether or not it arose to the level of criminality is a moot point now since Mr Kols has departed this earth.

There is a double standard here. It is stating that Zwillinger is innocent until proven guilty while painting him as being unethical at the same time.

rogdcam,
Here is one of your posts.


You called the man a criminal without ZERO evidence of intent. For all we know, it could be that Kols had someone in the office who was stealing, cooking the books, or was grossly incompetent. Yet you libeled the dying man with accusations of being a thief. You did not accuse the company of ripping people off, you accused the man of being a thief.

Yet now you have concerns about bad press? Like I said, lets be consistent; pick a side of the discussion and stick to it.
Don

EDIT: By the way, there is another scenario that could also apply to the Kols situation. His cancer could well have metastasized and was affecting his decision making. Most judges and juries would make this a consideration.

rogdcam,

The court of public opinion may in fact be wrong, and there may be a "rush to judgment", but the solution is NOT to censor the facts. That screams of whitewashing.

In fact, you are applying your own double standard:




Really? Was he "proven guilty" as you reference above? No. It's just that there were many data points confirming peoples' losses. He still wasn't actually found guilty in a court of law of anything. So why was it ok to tar and feather him, by your criteria?

In Kols' case, the APS published an expulsion. In Zwillinger's case, they published a suspension. Both are public record and worthy of notification and/or discussion.

Regardless of the differences between the scenarios in question, both are worthy of public discourse. The fact that you may find it distasteful doesn't mean that discussion should be quashed and threads deleted.

Points taken in regards to Kol. Given the fact that the APS had to step in and advocate for consigners and that it was acknowledged that said consigners needed to be made whole I stand by my point of view. I just find it interesting that some members take far more offense at ebay's reputation being impeached then they do a fellow human being. I have strong opinions on the Zwillinger topic since 11 years ago a longtime friend of mine took his own life after a lengthy legal battle involving felony accusations ended in an acquittal but his life was still utterly ruined. He was still tainted. Financially ruined, divorced and unable to obtain any real employment. Does the State of Maryland allow the dissemination of Court documents other than final disposition's. Yes. Do I agree with it? No

I am moving on to stamp collecting topics. I respect your opinions and am merely expressing mine.

In all fairness, I think you may be misinterpreting some of the commentary re: ebay. Unless I'm missing whom specifically you are referring to, I think what you are perceiving as defending ebay is actually pragmatic candor on what one can realistically expect a Fortune 500 company to change.

Being candid on what buyers and sellers on ebay can/should expect ebay to do as a business is different from defending their actions (or lack thereof).

If that isn't what you are referring to, then please disregard my comments.

Don..i strongly disagree with your decision not to remove this thread...the charges of rape, sex offense are personal attacks!!...and the news item should remain in a newspaper and not this forum.
How do I benefit from this information?

If you don't feel you benefit then don't read it. Criminal charges are not "personal attacks" in any case, they are a fact. He is charged, whether anyone writes about them or not. Whether they are true or not remains to be seen.

graphis,
Only the facts have been posted in this thread; charges of sex crimes have been bought against him. APS certainly is erroring on the side of safety with the notice and suspension. My censorship position is exactly the same as it was in the Kols thread, if I err it is on the side of transparency. Am I counting on people being fair minded? Yes, I am. Is this too optimistic? Probably. If you read the Kols thread you can see that many people jumped to judgment while I tried to get folks to remain neutral until more facts were discovered.

No question that this thread is 'cringe worthy'.

My fear, albeit uninformed of any details of this case, is that this may be an over-reaction as part of the 'Me Too' movement. I would hate if this turned out to be that a butt was inappropriately grabbed* and it ended up with these kinds of serious charges. Trying to find details of the case is what drove me to further discovery. I truly hope everyone remains open minded until a judgement or settlement is decided.

This is a 'no win' situation for the Moderators here. If we remove it, we anger half the members. If we keep it, we anger half the members. We are doing the best we can but have no solution that will appease everyone.
Don

*Not that this behavior would be acceptable in any way.

Alas, I seriously doubt that it is simply a case of "a butt was inappropriately grabbed". Inappropriate behavior should always be condemned, but either something VERY serious happened here or it did not.