Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
.... inducted into a place of honor in their little society.
So you're saying its exclusive.yes, a "little society" of more than 158,000 current, active members
yes, a "little society" of more than 158,000 current, active members
outside the lines is even jumping in!
gag order be damned!
http://espn.go.com/espnw/voices/art...aid-peyton-manning-sexual-assault-allegations
Thing is, the real reason this Manning stuff is news again 20 years later is because people are just now learning the extent of the allegations -- and just now realizing that for years the story had been treated with kid gloves.
I remember hearing about Manning's so-called college "prank" a year or so ago. It was a footnote in a larger story, an almost throwaway mention of an alleged 1996 "mooning" incident when he was a junior quarterback at UT. I'm never one to shrug off reports of alleged sexual assault, but this seemed like just a joke gone wrong, an immature student-athlete who accidentally mooned a female trainer while attempting to bare his backside to a fellow male athlete. That's how Manning spun the incident, that's how most writers reported at it the time, and that's how most writers have reported it ever since.
If reporters can write about Manning's alleged 1996 sexual assault incident with so much detail 20 years later, why wasn't the same care and attention given to it years ago? And why weren't those more-detailed allegations made clear until now, when he may have already played his final game? Was Manning's incredible football pedigree too intimidating? Was it simply easier to ignore athletes behaving badly before the days of social media? Was the "boys will be boys" mentality of that era so pervasive that women like Naughright were simply expected to keep quiet and take it? Did both fans and reporters create a narrative for Manning they were too scared to disrupt?
The truth is, it's probably a combination of all of those things. Manning was, to fans and media alike, one of the good guys. His football legacy, "aw shucks" attitude, legendary football IQ and fantastic comedic timing made him an easy guy to root for. And once the book has been written on a guy, no one wants to take the time to rewrite it, especially if the edits spoil the happy ending. It's easier to deny, deny, deny than to admit that a player might be great at football, great on TV, great at children's hospitals and charity events, but still be very flawed.
I can't imagine what it must be like to be so juvenile as to post chit that I KNOW is going to annoy 99% of everyone else here and make them all wish I would ESAD, and yet find that personally entertaining. I didn't understand that sort of behavior by others when I was in elementary school and I still don't. But everyone else on arguing the other side should just shut the hell up too. Jeebus this has gone on way too long.This has easily become the worst thread in OTF history. Pro- and anti-Manning posters both to blame. Every single poster delusional enough to think he or she is actually being objective should just go shoot themselves.
@TheOriginalHappyGoat: these drooling morons are destroying the AOTF.
And I am the one that gets reported?
I'm sure there's a "Who's Who" organization you can buy your way into as well.yes, a "little society" of more than 158,000 current, active members
Or lays them on its head.This thread gargles sweaty retard balls.
Ahhhhhhhhhhhh
It is a representation of this thread.WTF is that? Or, do I not want to know?
That list is retarded. Aaron Hernadez murdered several people and he's only at #20?? Yeah, that article was slanted from the get go. He should be A #1 on that list.There is a big benefit to society in identifying the phony charlatans and letting the truth be known.
nice rundown here of the 20 biggest jerks in the NFL, with the top 4 being Incognito, Ben, Peyton, and Vick:
http://www.thesportster.com/football/top-20-nfl-players-who-are-jerks-in-real-life/?view=all
Anyone can be a "member" or "fellow" if they pay in......no exclusiveness whatsoever.So you're saying its exclusive.
*facepalm*. Are you really this thick?Anyone can be a "member" or "fellow" if they pay in......no exclusiveness whatsoever.
I've actually been a member of that organization. Their national convention will be in Indy in like 2023 I think.*facepalm*. Are you really this thick?
You're completely full of utter bullshit. There is no fee. You can google the criteria. Excellence in research, ethics, safety, community involvement, scientific literacy.Anyone can be a "member" or "fellow" if they pay in......no exclusiveness whatsoever.
yepI've actually been a member of that organization. Their national convention will be in Indy in like 2023 I think.
When I was in the ER last week, I overheard the nurse talking to the guy on the other side of the curtain, "I know, honey, but you had a little bit of a bowel movement, and you don't want to lay in that, so we gotta get you cleaned up."This thread is like an elderly relative in a home.
I am just stopping by to see if it still alive (and wondering if I can get away with putting a pillow over its head).
yep
265th ACS National Meeting & Exposition
March 26-30, 2023
Indianapolis, Indiana
Kind of a "get" for Indy (though they had it in 2012 IIRC)
There are fewer cities capable of hosting an ACS national meeting than there are cities capable of hosting a Super Bowl.
LOL!Excellence in...ethics...
I've actually been a member of that organization.
Excellence in...literacy.
And, it just keeps sucking and sucking...This thread still sucks.