<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:s="http://www.techrepublic.com/search" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"  xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
<channel>
    <title><![CDATA[Discussion on More people are losing their jobs due to online missteps ]]></title>
    <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-333366]]></link>
    <atom:link rel="hub" type="application/rss+xml" href="http://pubsubhubbub.appspot.com/" />
    <atom:link rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" href="http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-333366/rss" />

    <description><![CDATA[]]></description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <lastBuildDate>2013-05-23T04:14:48-07:00</lastBuildDate>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Here is someone losing their liberty]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-333366-3341599]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[http://news.nationalpost.com/2010/08/11/speeding-teen-convicted-after-web-boast/Teen decides to brag about speeding at 140kmh in a 40 (85 in a 25 for our American cousins) on an online forum. Many forum members argue about safety and sanity, one figures out where the guy is from and contacts local police. Local police read the forum, confirm the identity, and canvas people on that street to see if there is a pattern. Kid gets arrested and pleas out to 6 months license suspension, 12 months probation.The kid obviously thought he was anonymous, but it didn't take much to track him down.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-333366-3341599]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[JamesRL]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Thu, 12 Aug 2010 06:17:28 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[linkedin.com is great object lesson]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-333366-3340863]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[When you view a linkedin profile, you not only see the individual, but how that individual is connected to you (i.e. 1st tier or direct contact, 2nd tier contact or friend of a friend, and 3rd tier contact.)  Once you collect a few hundred contacts, you may begin to notice that it gets more difficult to find someone beyond the 3rd tier level.   Unless one keeps a circle of friends small and intimate and those friends are likewise very discriminating and net savvy, it remains in our best interests to err on the side of caution with all 'public' communication.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-333366-3340863]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[zentross]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Wed, 11 Aug 2010 07:27:49 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[RE: More people are losing their jobs due to online missteps]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-333366-3340531]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[The thing is, if it is on the Internet, it must be considered &quot;public,&quot; because no matter what (John Doe)'s own social network account settings are, (John Doe)'s friends' friends may include numerous people or groups (John Doe) does not suspect, including current or potential employers or other parties who could &quot;raise a stink&quot; over (his) postings.  Be aware, and beware.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-333366-3340531]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[JandNL]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Tue, 10 Aug 2010 18:03:25 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Hate the Sin, Love the sinner...]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-333366-3336709]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[Nick, you're my new best friend.Here's the problem, Ocie.  Who are you, or who are they, to tell me that your views are the right ones?  What if I don't subscribe to any of those religious views?  Why should I have to follow the teachings of some group that I either don't believe in, or want nothing to do with?Perhaps I have assigned no particular taboo to the act of intercourse (Religious or otherwise), but tell my children that they should be aware of themselves and what feels right for them.  If they want to wait, more power to them, if not, well, then I would insist that they practice safely and at least attempt to wait until they and their partner turn 18.I view it much like every other &quot;vice&quot; we've created in this country.  If you're 18, and you want a cigarette, after you've heard repeatedly that they're bad for you, well, that's your decision, since, at 18, apparently, we magically become adults and capable of deciding for ourselves what we want to do.I just hope, for the love of God, that they don't do anything &quot;just because their friends are doing it.&quot;  That's the one excuse I won't accept.And marital laws of most of those religions were created at a time when, well, gosh darn it, if you didn't intend to have kids, well, you weren't helping your religion/race to continue on.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-333366-3336709]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[Slvrknght]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Wed, 04 Aug 2010 05:18:49 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[They learn most from you]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-333366-3336514]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[You are the prime example for your children.  By the time they start school, their initial values are set from what they've learned from you from infancy, both by observation and by asking.  If you stay involved while they are in school, no matter what example they get from others, the basic values they learned from you will stick.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-333366-3336514]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[NickNielsen]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Tue, 03 Aug 2010 18:20:40 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[You are correct, but...]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-333366-3336048]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[Riding nekkid on a zebra on safari is one thing. That is understandable - assuming the locals in that area walk around naked and think nothing of it. Posing naked for photos, or posting photos of your being naked on safari, is another. That's putting it out there for the whole world, where a lot of people for whom public nudity is not just everyday behaviour, like my children, will see them. A teacher does more than just teach. A teacher is an example for their students. As such, they have a higher level of responibility than other adults. If you aren't an authority figure of any kind in my children's lives, I couldn't care less what you do - that's your business. I've read a ton of these comments, and there's one thing I am seeing overlooked. True, parents are responsible for the way their children turn out, but what about the thousands (probably more like millions) of children, especially from inner cities, whose very existence is a result of their parents having no morals? Teachers also are responsible for the way students who have been placed in their care turn out. If a child is unruly or disruptive - or worse - teachers are responsible to quell that behaviour while the child is in their care. If their own behaviour then is questionable, how can I expect them to be a good example for my children?]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-333366-3336048]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[awgiedawgie]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Tue, 03 Aug 2010 06:31:30 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[RE: More people are losing their jobs due to online missteps]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-333366-3333718]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[I guess the point is, are we employing people to complete tasks assigned to them within the specified specs...or are we hiring people to be compete the tasks and be your buddy too. Work is work, Life is life. I do not consider work a apart of my life. It is just like sleeping and breathing, a requirement for life. I guess employers need to get that part through their head. Maybe the work place would be better if we enjoyed life.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-333366-3333718]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[taylorstan@...]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Thu, 29 Jul 2010 08:39:09 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[RE: More people are losing their jobs due to online missteps]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-333366-3332418]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[I don't know. Where I grew up &quot;nekkid&quot; meant no clothes on and you're up to something. Seriously, Ms. Nasr was fired by CNN. She is better off more than likely since CNN should be facing a lawsuit over sex discrimination any day. The VAST majority of people that have been let go in the past few months by CNN have been women. Throw in the fact that they seem to have hung their proverbial hat on clowns such as Rick &quot;I'll just steal all the ideas for my show form the internet&quot; Sanchez and CNN is listing seriously in the ocean of cable news. They are barely a shadow of the network they had become in the 90?s. Remember they were the first balloon brains to give Glenn &quot;the unmedicated schizophrenic&quot; a slot on the air. They have lost it in my opinion.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-333366-3332418]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[rogcoley@...]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Tue, 27 Jul 2010 16:06:22 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Thanks]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-333366-3330225]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[I appreciate the link.  It's a sad state of affairs for media in all forms.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-333366-3330225]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[dinotech]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Fri, 23 Jul 2010 13:42:40 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Agreed.]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-333366-3330209]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[I just wanted to point out the other discussion and details in case you weren't aware of them.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-333366-3330209]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[CharlieSpencer_Palmetto]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Fri, 23 Jul 2010 13:28:08 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[All true points, but]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-333366-3330138]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[...it still lends itself to this article based on principle alone which is to make sure we know what we want to say before we say it.  We certainly want to make sure if we are being recorded.Yes, the comments were taken out of context, but that has happened on both political sides of the fence.  The point here is that the speech lend itself to a racial profile and she mentioned party affiliation which is illegal for a government employee to do.This is why we are discussing Facebook, Twitter, et. al.  We all need to be careful in any medium.D]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-333366-3330138]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[dinotech]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Fri, 23 Jul 2010 12:33:22 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Sherrod discussion over here:]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-333366-3329313]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[http://blogs.techrepublic.com.com/career/?p=2216&amp;tag=content;leftColIf you hadn't heard of anyone getting fired that fast, you also haven't heard of anyone receiving an apology and an offer to return to work that quickly either.  In case you hadn't heard, the original clip was taken completely out of context.  The full video has been posted and it includes Sherrod saying her original attitude was wrong.  She's also been supported by the farmer she described in the out-of-context clip.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-333366-3329313]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[CharlieSpencer_Palmetto]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Thu, 22 Jul 2010 14:14:18 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[The Sherrod Incident]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-333366-3329295]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[While we are talking about using Facebook or Fwitter for online missteps, Shirley Sherrod was videotaped making racial statements against a farmer who was seeking her help.I've never heard of someone getting fired so fast, having to pull over in her car to do it.  That's a lawsuit for sure, but it just adds to this discussion because you have to be careful what you say and where you say it.  I don't want to focus on the story but on the medium; the medium used doesn't matter.  Facebook, Twitter, radio, television.  If you have character and integrity, you won't have to worry about making those mistakes (or at least not often since we are all human).It also shouldn't matter what position we hold in the company, whether we are going to be on Glenn Beck or Fox News, or whether we didn't really mean what we said (why did we say it in the first place?).A person with high integrity and character will know what to say when they say it and will mean what they say.  (cf santeewelding, billfranke, palmetto, et. al)]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-333366-3329295]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[dinotech]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Thu, 22 Jul 2010 13:28:34 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Understood ...]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-333366-3328910]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[When our kids were in Junior High and High School, we used to have a lot of debates with them (the wife and I).One of the things that appalled me was that they'd come home with their heads full of the thoughts, world views, political viewpoints, and philosophies as taught, and presumably believed, by their teachers and the educational establishment.What bothered me so much about this, was that what they were taught and told tended to be one-sided (PC), inaccurate, etc.So it became a game of sorts.  They'd come home and actually look forward to telling me some tidbit they'd been taught or told.  Just to see and hear what dear, old dad (or mom) had to say about it.Not long ago, at a family discussion, my kids (the youngest is now 30) told me they actually used to look forward to it.And that is that I'd listen to what they repeated about what they'd been told or read, and I'd look at them and tell them, &quot;Okay, now lets look at the rest of the story (or ... the other side of the story).&quot;I'm a sort of contrarian by nature.  I don't know why, maybe it was drummed into my head as a youth.  Both my father and my grandfather used to tell me over and over again, &quot;Look at, and examine all sides of any question, or problem, or situation.  Gather all the facts and points of view you can.  Never accept that just because someone, or many people, say that such and such is true ... that it is an absolute truth.  Even the best and brightest are wrong on a regular basis.  And many times in history the majority have been wrong.  Look at things from all angles, gather your facts pro and con and indifferent, and then make up your own darn mind.&quot;And that is what I tried to teach my children.Part and parcel to who and what I am, at the core of my spirit, is the philosophy of, &quot;YOU believe as you wish, and I'll believe as I wish and the way I see things.&quot;So the teachers and the schools would teach their point of view.  And I'd counter by telling my children mine.  Or, if I had no firm and particular view on the subject of my own, I'd tell them about how other people viewed the subject.And then I'd tell them, &quot;Okay, now that you have more than one side of the facts or thoughts, make up your own minds.&quot;I used to do that in regards to most any subject.Even religion.I am myself a religious sort.  Tho labeling me Christian or most anything else most folks might be familiar with would not be accurate.  By my raising as a child, my own beliefs might be described as a blend of Judeo-Christian and traditional Cherokee beliefs.  Mostly I just call myself non-denominational.My wife is Lutheran.I made my kids go to Lutheran church services, etc. The wife and I attended with them. Its never bothered me to go to whatever church, since while I may not believe in exactly the same way as that congregation, it doesn't matter.  I can speak with and commune with my concept of God most anywhere, don't even need a church.  And I welcome a chance to listen to what others say, to reflect upon it, think about it, etc.  Some I agree with, some I disagree with.   Doesn't bother me a bit that others might not believe exactly as I do.And my kids would quiz me from time to time about things taught in that church. &quot;What do you think about , Dad?&quot;  And I'd tell them.  But would add, &quot;However, just because I believe such and such, doesn't mean that I'm right, or have the only correct view.  You need to figure out for yourself what you believe.&quot;Chuckle, once when he was about 10 my son told me, in response to the statement above, that he'd decided he didn't believe at all, and thus he didn't want to go to church at all.I told him he'd not showed me yet that he'd been paying much attention to anything yet, nor had learned enough much about the subject.  He'd mostly doze or day dream in services. So I responded by telling him that until he sat up, paid attention, passed the classes they had at that church for the religious education of youth ... I wasn't accepting his decision.  He had to show me he'd learned enough about the subject to be making an &quot;informed decision&quot; before I'd listen to his argument that he shouldn't have to go.  And that was the way it went.  He attended and graduated their course of instruction, at age 15 or 16 IIRC. Then once again asked to be excused from going.  And I allowed it.For a long time he attended no church or nor private religious practice.  But would occasionally debate me about something in the Bible.  As concerns what he thought it meant, or had been told it meant.  And I'd give him my point of view.  And often enough, several others.  Just to give him something to think about.Nowadays, he's 34 with 5 kids of his own, and attends a non-denominational church.  Of his own free will.  Having decided that there is worth to it, and things religious he does believe in, just not exactly the way the Lutherans (or whatever) believe and practice.All 3 of my kids (2 by birth, one by adoption) dropped out of High School before finishing it.  All 3 opted to attend an Adult Learning Center, in conjunction with home tutoring, in order to finish their HS Diploma.  I allowed the drop out of regular public school as long as they kept pursuing their educations.  In fact, I was enthused about the idea.  Too much of their time in that regular High School was spent studying clap-trap, as far as I was concerned.I wanted them to spend more time on core subjects, the 3 R's.  And they did. The son and the adopted daughter went on to tech schools and did well.  And have done well since in their careers. The other daughter I intensively tutored in math and science.  Later she applied for and got a scholarship at a teaching college based upon her scores.  And graduated at the top of her class.  And is now a math teacher at the high school level.I'm proud of all of them.  And they're pretty much free thinkers.  I'd have it no other way.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-333366-3328910]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[Osiyo53@...]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Thu, 22 Jul 2010 03:23:56 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[What is the correlation between the 2?]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-333366-3328863]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[I find it hard to be able to associate the two in a way which would effect ones employment opportunities... It is in my oppinion that such behaviour online whether on Facebook or a chat group could be related to ones position in a company. Especially if that individual does not disclose the company which they work for. It is therefore in my opinion that an employee can not be fired or dismissed based on their opinion or view points outside of their work! Whether it is controversial or not. In enabling employers and companies to fire an individual based on their actions or opinions outside of their work is an outrage and undermines an individuals rights to expression, implied or expressed. I would hope others would agree with me on this matter. In allowing this to happen are we not yet again giving up our rights as individuals and therefore creating another grey area where these rights can be abused? Imagine if you got drunk in a bar, nightclub or party during the weekend (unrelated to work)i.e NOT a work function and was fired the following Monday due to your behaviour in an unrelated event? Thank you for reading my post...]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-333366-3328863]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[TechnoBaron]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Thu, 22 Jul 2010 01:18:04 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[I couldn't disagree more]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-333366-3327338]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[    I submit that occupation DOES matter if one's occupation by its nature is pushing one message and your actions push a different message. Frankly, hypocrisy is ugly.Hypocrisy is saying it's okay for a flight attendant to do it, but not a teacher.  A flight attendant, in fact, has more authority than a teacher.  He/she can have you arrested by federal aviation authorities and local police, they command the attention of hundreds to thousands of adults per day, etc.So, hypocrisy is saying it's okay for one profession and not the other.    Scripture demands that pastors have a family that is 'in order' - if a guy can't lead his family, he's unqualified to lead his flock.Hence why I said I can understand a pastor/priest/rabbi being expected not to do it.  They have a specific moral compass to follow according to their profession due to its religious nature.Neither being a teacher nor a flight attendant requires you to be a specific religion in all cases.    I would say that *anyone* in a position of authority should conduct his life so that the spotlight he shines on others during his official duties will not display a different message if shined on himself. Pastors shouldn't be messing around with their female parishoners; cops shouldn't deal drugs; moms shouldn't lie, teachers who demand decency in the classroom should behave decently; elected officials demanding transparency in government should themselves be transparent... um...wait... So, pastors can mess around with their male parishioners?Dads should lie?Sounds almost like this is turning toward &quot;Women shouldn't...&quot; talk.But, you have your ways and I have mine.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-333366-3327338]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[jck]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Tue, 20 Jul 2010 05:19:51 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[EliSc, I think he's lost]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-333366-3327324]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[There's another current discussion on the subject of defragmentation, but this ain't it.  Besides, TR discussions never stay on topic; it's part of the 'hanging out at the water cooler' atmosphere.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-333366-3327324]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[CharlieSpencer_Palmetto]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Tue, 20 Jul 2010 04:30:15 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[I was responding to the specific sentence posted:]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-333366-3327284]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[The poster above me wrote: &quot;Presumably she has her reasons for respecting this individual and they are neither your nor my business.&quot;I disagreed with that and explained why. BTW, the rest of this post is also not about defragmenting hard drives. Why didn't you complain about the other 250 posts?]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-333366-3327284]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[EliSc]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Tue, 20 Jul 2010 00:37:22 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Which is why we homeschooled]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-333366-3327133]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[1) the kids get a WHOLE lot of their moral education from the other kids: probably unqualified;2) the kids MAY get some from their teachers: likely unqualified (though I recognize many teachers are saints);If you homeschool, your kids will turn out warped like you instead of warped like their classmates or teachers. I submit that for many, that's a much better choice.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-333366-3327133]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[Paymeister]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Mon, 19 Jul 2010 15:50:27 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Peculiar opinions?]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-333366-3327121]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[That Fadllalah did all those things is not in question; they are facts.  That 6 million people died as a result of Nazi extermination efforts is also fact; the Nazis kept good documentation.Where's the opinion in that piece, other than Fadllalah's stated opinions?]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-333366-3327121]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[NickNielsen]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Mon, 19 Jul 2010 15:38:55 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
    </channel>
</rss>

