Bearfax
Grizzly old fart
Mark from Brisbane said:
You may very well be right Mark. I'm not saying I'm right, and quite frankly I dont care if I'm wrong. But you havent proved anything to me by your comment. You say all available on the internet, yet no one including yourself has mentioned many of those issues, especially regarding Gutherson.
In my former profession I operated on evidence supplied before making judgement calls. Fundamental. No, not a cop but close.The individual identifying himself/herself/itself as the Recruitment Officer supplied information that suggests inside knowledge. Some of that knowledge may be padding with falsehoods but no one has so far indicated whether that information is true or false and how such information could have been gained, especially as much of it seems new to these forums. You've made a broad statement that all is available on the internet. OK. Lets start there. Where is it? I would certainly like to know so I dont go on long unsuccessful ventures trying to find information. Please supply the sites.
As I said the claim that he is DW or someone close to the club remains a believable scenario, given the information supplied if it is valid. I dont know you and who you are and despite your claims you have given no evidence that you know what you claim to know. You in fact may be doing the conning for all we know such is the anonymity on these forums. I may be conning you and could have been the Recruitment Officer myself using another pseudonym. I've certainly played that game before elsewhere on other forums for fun, and despite the con, no one has picked up on it yet (not these forums by the way...but then how would you know... are you that good at picking cons...what's you thoughts). Or it may be you playing the game. Such is the ease of being 'The Con' on these forums.
No disrespect intended, but if you are in the know then you will also know the validity of the claims made and how they were obtained, and supply evidence to support that position. An unsupported statement that you know what happens in the club is less believable so far than what the 'Recruitment Officer' is saying, whoever that is, and I'm not saying it has to be DW.
Supply some facts Mark to justify your position. Place yourself in the minds of other readers Would you believe you based on what you've said. At least DW or whoever the Recruitment Officer is, has given us information, and if that information is true, it then is unimportant who supplied it. And in my career I'v met some of the best cons in the business and you realise the con by inconsistencies, not by just dismissing their claim without proof. At this stage in my opinion the jury is still out. Whether its true or false has yet to be confirmed and therefore his/her identity as either DW or someone in the club at this stage has more substance than yours. Give us reason to believe you. Supply us with the inconsistencies.
Just a point to mull over. You say it is policy that statements unvetted by Management are not allowed. That may be so and I accept it reduces the likelihood of DW being the person. But this club has been fraught with apparent leaks from inside for the last few years, much of which has turned out to be confirmed. If this is another example then what is important is the information, not the identity of the revealer. Dont throw the baby out with the bath water as they say. What's important here is the information supplied and whether its valid or not, in which case being 'conned' becomes somewhat irrelevant
Over to you Mark (or Dave?).
