If one shop has a thief working for them and he gets found out, everyone benefits from knowing before they get taken also. If another shop 'warns' us, why would we hire the person???
See, it's this attitude that proves why what CFB did was so wrong.
Here's a newsflash for you, People lie. Yes even business owners lie. Furthermore, business owners often fire the wrong people for various alleged issues.
It's kinda sad to me that you've never even considered the possibility that this person that might be applying for a job was innocent.
See, it's this attitude that proves why what CFB did was so wrong.
Here's a newsflash for you, People lie. Yes even business owners lie. Furthermore, business owners often fire the wrong people for various alleged issues.
It's kinda sad to me that you've never even considered the possibility that this person that might be applying for a job was innocent.
If you decide to interview the person, they claim they are innocent, they say the other business lied and falsly fired them, and you hire them that is your decision. I will keep my business and product and customers and reputation and money and family away from a known (alleged) theif. Honestly, in todays economy and with the number of people looking for work and in actual need of supporing them and/or their family, you would hire this guy after being warned of why he was fired??? Just in case another business, w/ all it takes to make it work in todays world to make it, lied and possibly put their tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars @ risk???
If you decide to interview the person, they claim they are innocent, they say the other business lied and falsly fired them, and you hire them that is your decision. I will keep my business and product and customers and reputation and money and family away from a known (alleged) theif. Honestly, in todays economy and with the number of people looking for work and in actual need of supporing them and/or their family, you would hire this guy after being warned of why he was fired??? Just in case another business, w/ all it takes to make it work in todays world to make it, lied and possibly put their tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars @ risk???
Your decision to protect your business is both understandable, and deplorable. Basically your the typical employer.
Which again, is why CFB should have known better before ruining a man's career by publicly calling him a thief.
I hope TSG makes a comeback, and I hope CFB suffers some harsh times ahead. That MIGHT even the karmic scales a bit.
Your decision to protect your business is both understandable, and deplorable. Basically your the typical employer.
Which again, is why CFB should have known better before ruining a man's career by publicly calling him a thief.
I hope TSG makes a comeback, and I hope CFB suffers some harsh times ahead. That MIGHT even the karmic scales a bit.
So wait, how do you know TSG is innocent?
If, hypothetically, someone at CFB absolutely, without a shadow of a doubt, knows that TSG stole from them, but can't get a conviction in criminal court (or don't wish to press charges), what the heck would you expect them to do? Pretend it didn't happen?
If TSG did steal -- and no one on this forum has evidence that he didn't -- then there is absolutely nothing deplorable about what CFB did.
You don't know nearly enough about this situation to be talking about karma.
Maybe you'd like to provide me with the name of your employer so I can call them and tell them all about how your a thief?
That's a ridiculous argument, and completely ignores what I was saying. You don't have any actual reason to believe that I'm a thief, or that anyone else on this forum is a thief.
Now, we have some reason to believe that TSG may be a thief. We know that CFB lost a significant amount of product, and we know that they accused and fired TSG for this reason. Is that proof, to us, that TSG is a thief? No, it only raises the possibility. It's likely that he is, but not "beyond a reasonable doubt" likely.
Does CFB know that TSG is a thief? It's quite possible that they do know. Again, there are a number of possible reasons for him not being prosecuted. It's possible that he's innocent. It's also possible that they know it but can't prove it, that the evidence is not admissible, or that they do not wish to press charges. If it's any of the latter cases, then you're entirely in the wrong saying what CFB did is "deplorable" or that they "should have known better."
Bottom line is we don't know what they knew, and assuming that CFB made a false accusation is just as wrong as assuming that TSG is a thief. In fact, there's more evidence of the latter than the former. Remember, "innocent until proven guilty" only applies to criminal court. All it means is that TSG can not go to jail unless he is convicted.
Also, not trying to be snarky here, but it's "you're," not "your."
Your decision to protect your business is both understandable, and deplorable. Basically your the typical employer.
Which again, is why CFB should have known better before ruining a man's career by publicly calling him a thief.
I hope TSG makes a comeback, and I hope CFB suffers some harsh times ahead. That MIGHT even the karmic scales a bit.
This entire thread is about his being back in the industry . . . how did they ruin his career??? Isn't he back??? Didn't he already make a comeback??? Why do you hate CFB for firing an employee they believe stole from them??? Were they supposed to just let him go to some other business w/ a lot of loose product around for him to (possibly) pilfer, without any possible notice???
I am not the police. He is free. I 'saw' or read the evidence and is good enough for me to go along with the logical conclusion.
You know what CFB has told us.
None of us know the entire story, all we have is one side of the events.
Now I don't want to be telling people what to think but I do believe that judging someone based on one party's version of what happened when that party clearly feels betrayed by the other isn't a good idea.
I agree that based on what CFB told us TSG looks guilty as sin, however I keep in mind we don't know the whole story.
I can appreciate that public opinion shouldn't be aligned with what the courts say but I do think we should give pause and consider that the people we collectively pay (well not me because I'm Canadian but that's besides the point) to catch crooks don't seem to have enough to charge him: that doesn't mean he didn't do it, it means that people who have access to all the facts (we do not) don't have enough to even charge him (let alone find him guilty). It isn't like OJ because we all saw the court proceedings and we all know he did it and got off on a technicality; could TSG be getting off on a technicality? Sure but we don't know that so I am willing to give him the benefit of the doubt; I don't think everyone should agree with me but I do think everyone should recognize that we don't know the whole story and saying his guilty is based on very circumstantial evidence.
I believe I don't know enough about the situation to call him outright guilty or innocent but I will presume he's innocent but I will also admit I am a very forgiving person and usually always look for the good in people (it's a fault of mine) but appreciate that not everyone is like me (thank god!).
None of us know the entire story, all we have is one side of the events.
Now I don't want to be telling people what to think but I do believe that judging someone based on one party's version of what happened when that party clearly feels betrayed by the other isn't a good idea.
I agree that based on what CFB told us TSG looks guilty as sin, however I keep in mind we don't know the whole story.
I can appreciate that public opinion shouldn't be aligned with what the courts say but I do think we should give pause and consider that the people we collectively pay (well not me because I'm Canadian but that's besides the point) to catch crooks don't seem to have enough to charge him: that doesn't mean he didn't do it, it means that people who have access to all the facts (we do not) don't have enough to even charge him (let alone find him guilty). It isn't like OJ because we all saw the court proceedings and we all know he did it and got off on a technicality; could TSG be getting off on a technicality? Sure but we don't know that so I am willing to give him the benefit of the doubt; I don't think everyone should agree with me but I do think everyone should recognize that we don't know the whole story and saying his guilty is based on very circumstantial evidence.
I believe I don't know enough about the situation to call him outright guilty or innocent but I will presume he's innocent but I will also admit I am a very forgiving person and usually always look for the good in people (it's a fault of mine) but appreciate that not everyone is like me (thank god!).
3 months ago TSG 'said' this:
"I did not perpetrate theft from Channel Fireball.
On August 9th 2012 I went to CF in order to film Magic TV. Instead I was confronted and interrogated for 3 hours by local police detectives. I answered all their questions and was immediately driven to my home where I turned over my personal collection including sealed products; they hoped to link bar codes on boxes from my collection to similar boxes believed to have been stolen from CF.
After being up until all hours of the night, I slept in late and awoke to find one text message and one missed call as the only attempted correspondence from CF. Since then I have had no further contact with the company CF.
The detectives told me I would need to wait for them to investigate potential matches between CF inventory holes and my own collection as well as track the origin of bar codes from my boxes. After more than a month of waiting I was informed the police had found zero links between my cards/products and the stolen materials. I was free to pick up my items.
Case closed.
I did not steal from Channel Fireball. I have chosen to remain silent on this whole matter in the hopes that it could be resolved quickly and quietly, also because I was deeply hurt by the post made on CF about this matter. I do not know why CF posted such a thing and can only assume it was posted out of hurt and presumed betrayal. This has been a very public and hurtful experience and I have tried to act with professionalism and dignity. I have no desire to call anyone names or throw out cruel accusations, those who have hurt me know who they are and there is no need to talk about them, they are no longer worth my time."
I believe I don't know enough about the situation to call him outright guilty or innocent but I will presume he's innocent ...
And this is fine.
But, to jump off your post a bit, if we're presuming TSG to be innocent, then we must also afford CFB the same benefit of the doubt. If we don't know what happened, then we can't declare CFB guilty of throwing around a false accusation any more than we can declare TSG guilty of committing the crime.
But, to jump off your post a bit, if we're presuming TSG to be innocent, then we must also afford CFB the same benefit of the doubt. If we don't know what happened, then we can't declare CFB guilty of throwing around a false accusation any more than we can declare TSG guilty of committing the crime.
Agreed
I do think it was a bit much for them to put so much information online but I know it wasn't malicious, they just wanted to let us know what was going on.
If I had been in charge I would have told them to put something online akin to "TSG and CFB have had a falling out and are going in different directions; we would like to thank TSG for all his hard work and wish him well in futue endeavours"
It's short and sweet and, most of all, clean. People will speculate but I believe that when making something official it's better to not commit to something unless you are 100% certain (and that shouldn't happen that often)
But, to jump off your post a bit, if we're presuming TSG to be innocent, then we must also afford CFB the same benefit of the doubt. If we don't know what happened, then we can't declare CFB guilty of throwing around a false accusation any more than we can declare TSG guilty of committing the crime.
You can't think they're both innocent in this. One side is wrong. It's an either/or scenario.
You can't think they're both innocent in this. One side is wrong. It's an either/or scenario.
His point is that you don't know which one is right, so you should treat both as innocent if you're going to treat one as innocent. Unless you want to admit your bias
CFB might of goofed i've heard of employers getting sued for defamation, even if I "feel" like he probably did it it could of just as easily been anyone there really for all I know.
Yeah, for giggles CF decided to accuse the guy who was the front man for their company of stealing. CF lost one of the top 3 commentators in the industry, and the one they had employeed full-time.I am not saying he is guilty or innocent, but CF lost a lot firing TSG.
Unfortuately they run a business and have to make a hard real life decsion not some fantasy land type of scenario where anything can happen or be true.
Anyways, I wish TSG luck in life. Hopefully he gets something good going if he doesn`t already.
I think you guys are missing a huge part of the problem.
TSG shouldn't have been buying/selling large quantities of cards. Its a huge conflict of interest.
Its one thing to sell from your personal collection while working as a buyer/seller for a retailer, but it is something entirely different to acquire cards for the purpose of selling them(which he clearly was given the quantities reported to be sold on ebay). Wasn't CFB paying him to do for them what he was doing for himself?
CFB had every right to fire him if he was suspected to have done what he was accused/suspected of doing. If you thought that someone had stolen from you, even if you didnt have video evidence of it, would you want them to continue working for you? I highly doubt it. Trust is key when it comes to employees and business environments. If I cannot trust you, then you arent going to work for me, its as simple as that. If he legitimately didnt do it, well thats unfortunate for him to be sure, but a business has no obligation to keep a person employed at their place of business if the business can no longer trust them as employees. Courts and the police tend to require a significant amount of proof before they will ever prosecute. There is no realistic way to be able to prove that individual cards were from the shop or from somewhere else, sealed product is a little easier there, but since the whole thing was about singles coming up missing from the shop and the ebay store of the employee having similar stock to what was missing (by the time they realized it) its not going to be something that the police are going to be able to as easily track to determine for certain that the cards he had were the exact ones that were from the shop.
I ran into an issue several years ago where there was significant amounts of circumstantial evidence that was accumulated, but nothing that 100% proved that he did it when a stack of valueable cards was stolen from the shop by a customer. The evidence we had was enough for us to choose to ban him. I didnt bring it to the police, simply due to not having that concrete evidence that would have been required for them to make a proper and prosecutable case against him. We had every right to ban him as a customer, just as we would have had every right to fire him if he was an employee in the same regard.
Just my own personal point of view on the situation, and my own relateable story to add to the discussion as well.
There's a big difference between firing someone for suspecting they're a thief, and telling thousands/millions of interested people that he's a thief. The first is well within CFB's rights, the second isn't.
In this instance, full disclosure also warned all of MTG what their 'new' hire might be capable of . . . which many be very thankful for knowing.
If my boss fired me for stealing, I guess you would be right iffn they warned future employers of my ability to steal from them. If I was innocent, I would sue my former boss and prove it and get lotsa $$$ . . . just like TSG is, right???
You would prove you're innocent how? Accusations are extremely damning in our society, most people take them as a conviction with no additional proof such as is the case here with TSG. Innocence is also near impossible to prove, that's why our system works on guilty/not guilty rather than guilty/innocent.
You would simply get your reputation ruined and be out a job. You could maybe make a case against your former employer for defmamation/libel but it would be an expensive case that you wouldn't even win if they wrote it the same way CFB wrote theirs. If you look at the way CFB wrote their announcement, they never directly accused him which gets around libel laws, they just led everyone to believe it.
What CFB's case basically comes down to the fact that TSG was running a side business selling cards, and because he had cards they were missing, he must have done it. Even the police confirmed he had lots of sealed product (for you know, pulling cards and selling).
LSV knew TSG traded online extensively and knew his account handle through casual conversation. He waited until he saw ebay listings for the sale of a large number of high end standard cards under that account. He then proceeded to steal, in the same quantity, those cards from the inventory of CF. Afterwards, he casually mentioned the gap in inventory to management and that perhaps whoever took the cards was trying to move them on ebay. Meanwhile he had actually sold them offline in the gray market.
How does that sound. Sounds pretty circumstantial doesn't it. Well it has about as much worth as CF's thinly veiled accusation under the pretense of 'factual' events in their public announcement.
LSV knew TSG traded online extensively and knew his account handle through casual conversation. He waited until he saw ebay listings for the sale of a large number of high end standard cards under that account. He then proceeded to steal, in the same quantity, those cards from the inventory of CF. Afterwards, he casually mentioned the gap in inventory to management and that perhaps whoever took the cards was trying to move them on ebay. Meanwhile he had actually sold them offline in the gray market.
How does that sound. Sounds pretty circumstantial doesn't it. Well it has about as much worth as CF's thinly veiled accusation under the pretense of 'factual' events in their public announcement.
That would be jack and squat, in that order.
Not sure what you're trying to get at here. We don't know if TSG did anything or not. However, it's quite possible that CF does know, or has reason to suspect him. They know more about the situation. They might know, with absolute certainty, that he stole from them. It's possible that they're mistaken. It's fairly unlikely, though not impossible, that someone is framing him.
The "theory" you made up here is ridiculous because you have nothing to base it on. You don't know TSG, you don't know LSV, you don't know anyone involved. I don't either, but CF presumable does know things that we do not, so there's more of a reason to believe what they're saying. We shouldn't blindly trust them, but it's even stupider to baselessly accuse them of lying.
Whoever is responsible, CF was almost certainly stolen from. It's very unlikely that a store would just make that up. Why in the world shouldn't they accuse the person they suspect of stealing from them? Again, we're not talking about guilty/innocent because this isn't criminal court. No one has been charged with anything.
Not sure what you're trying to get at here. We don't know if TSG did anything or not. However, it's quite possible that CF does know, or has reason to suspect him. They know more about the situation. They might know, with absolute certainty, that he stole from them. It's possible that they're mistaken. It's fairly unlikely, though not impossible, that someone is framing him.
The "theory" you made up here is ridiculous because you have nothing to base it on. You don't know TSG, you don't know LSV, you don't know anyone involved. I don't either, but CF presumable does know things that we do not, so there's more of a reason to believe what they're saying. We shouldn't blindly trust them, but it's even stupider to baselessly accuse them of lying.
Whoever is responsible, CF was almost certainly stolen from. It's very unlikely that a store would just make that up. Why in the world shouldn't they accuse the person they suspect of stealing from them? Again, we're not talking about guilty/innocent because this isn't criminal court. No one has been charged with anything.
Let me sum up my gist because basically a lot of people don't seem to get what I and many others are saying.
Was CF justified in firing TSG? Yes.
Was CF justified in how they did it? No.
Did TSG steal the product? Nobody knows. Including CF.
Will the way CF communicated the firing hurt TSG's chances at getting another job? Yes.
Was the damage done to TSG's credibility justified? No.
My theory is ridiculous??
Prove it.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
There are 10 types of people in this world, those that understand binary and those that don't.
Was CF justified in firing TSG? Yes.
Was CF justified in how they did it? No.
Did TSG steal the product? Nobody knows. Including CF.
How do you know CF doesn't know? You don't know what they know. For all we know, they may have watched him do it. They definitely know more about the situation than we do.
Will the way CF communicated the firing hurt TSG's chances at getting another job? Yes.
Was the damage done to TSG's credibility justified? No.
And again, how do you know? If CF is certain that he stole from them, then why the heck shouldn't they come out and say so?
My theory is ridiculous??
Prove it.
It's not a theory, and I don't have to prove a negative. I could come up with a story that LSV and TSG are currently riding through space on a magic unicorn, and ask you to disprove it, and you'd have a very hard time doing so. (How do you know magic space unicorns aren't real?) But that story is still ridiculous, because I have absolutely no basis for believing any of that.
...
It's not a theory, and I don't have to prove a negative. I could come up with a story that LSV and TSG are currently riding through space on a magic unicorn, and ask you to disprove it, and you'd have a very hard time doing so. (How do you know magic space unicorns aren't real?) But that story is still ridiculous, because I have absolutely no basis for believing any of that.
I could be wrong, but I think that was his point. Nobody can prove a negative, thats why the negative (innocence in this case) is always assumed until proof is provided.
In the meantime, everyone knows that CFB did something because the thing they did is release a statement. There is proof of that statement existing because its still on their website. It therefore makes sense for people to discuss that announcement given how little information is known about the situation and how little explanation the statement actually provides compared to the accusations it seems to imply.
It basically says: Quantities of four different cards from a recent set with a limited number of valuable cards have gone missing from our inventory. On further investigation we determined that one of our employees owns an ebay account which also sells those four cards. Therefore those cards are the same cards that were stolen.
Thats a big logical leap there that begs for further explanation.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
See, it's this attitude that proves why what CFB did was so wrong.
Here's a newsflash for you, People lie. Yes even business owners lie. Furthermore, business owners often fire the wrong people for various alleged issues.
It's kinda sad to me that you've never even considered the possibility that this person that might be applying for a job was innocent.
If you decide to interview the person, they claim they are innocent, they say the other business lied and falsly fired them, and you hire them that is your decision. I will keep my business and product and customers and reputation and money and family away from a known (alleged) theif. Honestly, in todays economy and with the number of people looking for work and in actual need of supporing them and/or their family, you would hire this guy after being warned of why he was fired??? Just in case another business, w/ all it takes to make it work in todays world to make it, lied and possibly put their tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars @ risk???
I am not the police. He is free. I 'saw' or read the evidence and is good enough for me to go along with the logical conclusion.
Your decision to protect your business is both understandable, and deplorable. Basically your the typical employer.
Which again, is why CFB should have known better before ruining a man's career by publicly calling him a thief.
I hope TSG makes a comeback, and I hope CFB suffers some harsh times ahead. That MIGHT even the karmic scales a bit.
So wait, how do you know TSG is innocent?
If, hypothetically, someone at CFB absolutely, without a shadow of a doubt, knows that TSG stole from them, but can't get a conviction in criminal court (or don't wish to press charges), what the heck would you expect them to do? Pretend it didn't happen?
If TSG did steal -- and no one on this forum has evidence that he didn't -- then there is absolutely nothing deplorable about what CFB did.
You don't know nearly enough about this situation to be talking about karma.
Prove to me that your not a thief.
Go ahead.
I'm waiting.
Maybe you'd like to provide me with the name of your employer so I can call them and tell them all about how your a thief?
That's a ridiculous argument, and completely ignores what I was saying. You don't have any actual reason to believe that I'm a thief, or that anyone else on this forum is a thief.
Now, we have some reason to believe that TSG may be a thief. We know that CFB lost a significant amount of product, and we know that they accused and fired TSG for this reason. Is that proof, to us, that TSG is a thief? No, it only raises the possibility. It's likely that he is, but not "beyond a reasonable doubt" likely.
Does CFB know that TSG is a thief? It's quite possible that they do know. Again, there are a number of possible reasons for him not being prosecuted. It's possible that he's innocent. It's also possible that they know it but can't prove it, that the evidence is not admissible, or that they do not wish to press charges. If it's any of the latter cases, then you're entirely in the wrong saying what CFB did is "deplorable" or that they "should have known better."
Bottom line is we don't know what they knew, and assuming that CFB made a false accusation is just as wrong as assuming that TSG is a thief. In fact, there's more evidence of the latter than the former. Remember, "innocent until proven guilty" only applies to criminal court. All it means is that TSG can not go to jail unless he is convicted.
Also, not trying to be snarky here, but it's "you're," not "your."
This entire thread is about his being back in the industry . . . how did they ruin his career??? Isn't he back??? Didn't he already make a comeback??? Why do you hate CFB for firing an employee they believe stole from them??? Were they supposed to just let him go to some other business w/ a lot of loose product around for him to (possibly) pilfer, without any possible notice???
You know what CFB has told us.
None of us know the entire story, all we have is one side of the events.
Now I don't want to be telling people what to think but I do believe that judging someone based on one party's version of what happened when that party clearly feels betrayed by the other isn't a good idea.
I agree that based on what CFB told us TSG looks guilty as sin, however I keep in mind we don't know the whole story.
I can appreciate that public opinion shouldn't be aligned with what the courts say but I do think we should give pause and consider that the people we collectively pay (well not me because I'm Canadian but that's besides the point) to catch crooks don't seem to have enough to charge him: that doesn't mean he didn't do it, it means that people who have access to all the facts (we do not) don't have enough to even charge him (let alone find him guilty). It isn't like OJ because we all saw the court proceedings and we all know he did it and got off on a technicality; could TSG be getting off on a technicality? Sure but we don't know that so I am willing to give him the benefit of the doubt; I don't think everyone should agree with me but I do think everyone should recognize that we don't know the whole story and saying his guilty is based on very circumstantial evidence.
I believe I don't know enough about the situation to call him outright guilty or innocent but I will presume he's innocent but I will also admit I am a very forgiving person and usually always look for the good in people (it's a fault of mine) but appreciate that not everyone is like me (thank god!).
3 months ago TSG 'said' this:
"I did not perpetrate theft from Channel Fireball.
On August 9th 2012 I went to CF in order to film Magic TV. Instead I was confronted and interrogated for 3 hours by local police detectives. I answered all their questions and was immediately driven to my home where I turned over my personal collection including sealed products; they hoped to link bar codes on boxes from my collection to similar boxes believed to have been stolen from CF.
After being up until all hours of the night, I slept in late and awoke to find one text message and one missed call as the only attempted correspondence from CF. Since then I have had no further contact with the company CF.
The detectives told me I would need to wait for them to investigate potential matches between CF inventory holes and my own collection as well as track the origin of bar codes from my boxes. After more than a month of waiting I was informed the police had found zero links between my cards/products and the stolen materials. I was free to pick up my items.
Case closed.
I did not steal from Channel Fireball. I have chosen to remain silent on this whole matter in the hopes that it could be resolved quickly and quietly, also because I was deeply hurt by the post made on CF about this matter. I do not know why CF posted such a thing and can only assume it was posted out of hurt and presumed betrayal. This has been a very public and hurtful experience and I have tried to act with professionalism and dignity. I have no desire to call anyone names or throw out cruel accusations, those who have hurt me know who they are and there is no need to talk about them, they are no longer worth my time."
https://twitter.com/TristanGregson/status/273246276726947841
And this is fine.
But, to jump off your post a bit, if we're presuming TSG to be innocent, then we must also afford CFB the same benefit of the doubt. If we don't know what happened, then we can't declare CFB guilty of throwing around a false accusation any more than we can declare TSG guilty of committing the crime.
Agreed
I do think it was a bit much for them to put so much information online but I know it wasn't malicious, they just wanted to let us know what was going on.
If I had been in charge I would have told them to put something online akin to "TSG and CFB have had a falling out and are going in different directions; we would like to thank TSG for all his hard work and wish him well in futue endeavours"
It's short and sweet and, most of all, clean. People will speculate but I believe that when making something official it's better to not commit to something unless you are 100% certain (and that shouldn't happen that often)
You can't think they're both innocent in this. One side is wrong. It's an either/or scenario.
His point is that you don't know which one is right, so you should treat both as innocent if you're going to treat one as innocent. Unless you want to admit your bias
Nope, he publicly denied stealing.
Once again.
a great reminder of why CFB was in the wrong.
Yeah, for giggles CF decided to accuse the guy who was the front man for their company of stealing. CF lost one of the top 3 commentators in the industry, and the one they had employeed full-time.I am not saying he is guilty or innocent, but CF lost a lot firing TSG.
Unfortuately they run a business and have to make a hard real life decsion not some fantasy land type of scenario where anything can happen or be true.
Anyways, I wish TSG luck in life. Hopefully he gets something good going if he doesn`t already.
He denied stealing, therefore CFB was wrong to accuse him of stealing? You do see the disconnect here, don't you?
TSG shouldn't have been buying/selling large quantities of cards. Its a huge conflict of interest.
Its one thing to sell from your personal collection while working as a buyer/seller for a retailer, but it is something entirely different to acquire cards for the purpose of selling them(which he clearly was given the quantities reported to be sold on ebay). Wasn't CFB paying him to do for them what he was doing for himself?
There's a big difference between firing someone for suspecting they're a thief, and telling thousands/millions of interested people that he's a thief. The first is well within CFB's rights, the second isn't.
You would prove you're innocent how? Accusations are extremely damning in our society, most people take them as a conviction with no additional proof such as is the case here with TSG. Innocence is also near impossible to prove, that's why our system works on guilty/not guilty rather than guilty/innocent.
You would simply get your reputation ruined and be out a job. You could maybe make a case against your former employer for defmamation/libel but it would be an expensive case that you wouldn't even win if they wrote it the same way CFB wrote theirs. If you look at the way CFB wrote their announcement, they never directly accused him which gets around libel laws, they just led everyone to believe it.
What CFB's case basically comes down to the fact that TSG was running a side business selling cards, and because he had cards they were missing, he must have done it. Even the police confirmed he had lots of sealed product (for you know, pulling cards and selling).
LSV knew TSG traded online extensively and knew his account handle through casual conversation. He waited until he saw ebay listings for the sale of a large number of high end standard cards under that account. He then proceeded to steal, in the same quantity, those cards from the inventory of CF. Afterwards, he casually mentioned the gap in inventory to management and that perhaps whoever took the cards was trying to move them on ebay. Meanwhile he had actually sold them offline in the gray market.
How does that sound. Sounds pretty circumstantial doesn't it. Well it has about as much worth as CF's thinly veiled accusation under the pretense of 'factual' events in their public announcement.
That would be jack and squat, in that order.
Tiamat, Chromatic Dragon RWUBG
Planeswalker - Tiamat
[+1] Sit on Nicol Bolas
[+0] Wait for him to beg for mercy, rule the multiverse.
[-7] Not necessary, she is the ultimate.
Not sure what you're trying to get at here. We don't know if TSG did anything or not. However, it's quite possible that CF does know, or has reason to suspect him. They know more about the situation. They might know, with absolute certainty, that he stole from them. It's possible that they're mistaken. It's fairly unlikely, though not impossible, that someone is framing him.
The "theory" you made up here is ridiculous because you have nothing to base it on. You don't know TSG, you don't know LSV, you don't know anyone involved. I don't either, but CF presumable does know things that we do not, so there's more of a reason to believe what they're saying. We shouldn't blindly trust them, but it's even stupider to baselessly accuse them of lying.
Whoever is responsible, CF was almost certainly stolen from. It's very unlikely that a store would just make that up. Why in the world shouldn't they accuse the person they suspect of stealing from them? Again, we're not talking about guilty/innocent because this isn't criminal court. No one has been charged with anything.
Let me sum up my gist because basically a lot of people don't seem to get what I and many others are saying.
Was CF justified in firing TSG? Yes.
Was CF justified in how they did it? No.
Did TSG steal the product? Nobody knows. Including CF.
Will the way CF communicated the firing hurt TSG's chances at getting another job? Yes.
Was the damage done to TSG's credibility justified? No.
My theory is ridiculous??
Prove it.
Tiamat, Chromatic Dragon RWUBG
Planeswalker - Tiamat
[+1] Sit on Nicol Bolas
[+0] Wait for him to beg for mercy, rule the multiverse.
[-7] Not necessary, she is the ultimate.
How do you know CF doesn't know? You don't know what they know. For all we know, they may have watched him do it. They definitely know more about the situation than we do.
And again, how do you know? If CF is certain that he stole from them, then why the heck shouldn't they come out and say so?
It's not a theory, and I don't have to prove a negative. I could come up with a story that LSV and TSG are currently riding through space on a magic unicorn, and ask you to disprove it, and you'd have a very hard time doing so. (How do you know magic space unicorns aren't real?) But that story is still ridiculous, because I have absolutely no basis for believing any of that.
I could be wrong, but I think that was his point. Nobody can prove a negative, thats why the negative (innocence in this case) is always assumed until proof is provided.
In the meantime, everyone knows that CFB did something because the thing they did is release a statement. There is proof of that statement existing because its still on their website. It therefore makes sense for people to discuss that announcement given how little information is known about the situation and how little explanation the statement actually provides compared to the accusations it seems to imply.
It basically says: Quantities of four different cards from a recent set with a limited number of valuable cards have gone missing from our inventory. On further investigation we determined that one of our employees owns an ebay account which also sells those four cards. Therefore those cards are the same cards that were stolen.
Thats a big logical leap there that begs for further explanation.