Actuarial Outpost
 
Go Back   Actuarial Outpost > Actuarial Discussion Forum > General Actuarial
FlashChat Actuarial Discussion Preliminary Exams CAS/SOA Exams Cyberchat Around the World Suggestions


Upload your resume securely at https://www.dwsimpson.com
to be contacted when new jobs meet your skills and objectives.


General Actuarial Non-Specific Actuarial Topics - Before posting a thread, please browse over our other sections to see if there is a better fit, such as Careers - Employment, Actuarial Science Universities Forum or any of our other 100+ forums.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #101  
Old 09-08-2009, 12:46 PM
cubs1969 cubs1969 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 739
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Listeria View Post
Thank you. Tom may simply be unfamiliar with the history.

Anonymity in publishing (which is what we do when we post) is a new reality to be contended with in the cyber era. There are problems that come with it.

But anonymity also facilitates amazingly positive things, even just here in the AO.
I agree with your earlier post but this is not a new phenomena. See this http://www.cato.org/pubs/briefs/bp-054es.html

Quote:
Proposals to limit anonymous communications on the Internet would violate free speech rights long recognized by the Supreme Court. Anonymous and pseudonymous speech played a vital role in the founding of this country. Thomas Paine's Common Sense was first released signed, "An Englishman." Alexander Hamilton, John Jay, James Madison, Samuel Adams, and others carried out the debate between Federalists and Anti-Federalists using pseudonyms. Today, human rights workers in China and many other countries have reforged the link between anonymity and free speech.

Given the importance of anonymity as a component of free speech, the cost of banning anonymous Internet speech would be enormous. It makes no sense to treat Internet speech differently from printed leaflets or books.
Reply With Quote
  #102  
Old 09-08-2009, 12:56 PM
Not Mike Not Mike is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 9,724
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Double High C View Post
Perhaps they would have come out with fewer scars if they had focused on doing what is right, as opposed to narrowly worrying about what things would look like in the New York Times?

I give Bruce credit for being more focused on the integrity thing than the image thing.
So, if they had "done it right", according to the letter of IL Law, you think Bruce would have accepted the consequences without taking further action? That's pretty naive.
Reply With Quote
  #103  
Old 09-08-2009, 01:07 PM
douglan's Avatar
douglan douglan is offline
Semi-Reputable Actutorney
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: In the Zone
Posts: 13,320
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aaron Brachowitz View Post
I can get by just fine with FSA/EA. I think I might.
As many of you know, IANAA so I have little at stake in this mess, other than my hope that this can be resolved with your best interests in mind. While I have met many of you IRL, I consider myself to be a guest here, a fortunate lawyer tolerated by you folks and who considers himself lucky to have a direct connection with the actuarial profession and its members.

AB's post demonstrates why I believe the AAA has failed -- and failed spectacularly -- in handling this matter so far. If actuaries are considering dropping their AAA memberships over this dispute, then it is time for changes to the academy, its board membership, its policy platforms, and its governance procedures.

Like most of you, I have reviewed the court filings as well as the various letters, e-mails and other correspondence provided to date. In addition, I have spoken recently with many of you in private. Nearly all of you expressed concerns over the AAA's handling of this matter. At the heart of this mess, there were -- and there continues to be -- failures to keep you informed and to offer you the opportunity to shape the direction and leadership of your professional organization. This dispute with Bruce seems to be the "perfect storm" of sorts which finally brought these problems with the AAA to the surface.

Having now learned the history and substance of the revelations against Bruce, there is plenty of blame to be levied on both sides of this dispute. If I were Bruce, I would have handled the matter differently and resigned my position as President-elect so as not to damage the profession with the possibility of a protracted and messy lawsuit. I would not have liked to resign, of course, but no single person's objectives are more important than those of the thousands of people who depend on you to keep their best interests in mind. Bruce has made a good argument that he is indeed acting with the profession's best interests in mind. I respect his desire to bring reform to the AAA; however, I don't believe this lawsuit is the way to go about it.

In saying this, I am not excusing, in any way, the failure of the academy to exercise equitable, consistent, and transparent governance procedures. The board was in control of how this matter with Bruce was raised, how it was debated and decided, and how it was communicated to the members. The board failed massively in each of these areas and, in doing so, compromised their obligations to the individual members.

In my view, the next steps would be for members to register formally their concerns with the AAA. Perhaps a "no confidence" letter signed by individual members would spur the AAA to hold a special convention to address your concerns? I'm happy to put together a simple draft as a starting point. Just let me know, or PM me if you would like to discuss privately.
__________________
The Official AO Actutorney
Reply With Quote
  #104  
Old 09-08-2009, 01:12 PM
tbakos's Avatar
tbakos tbakos is offline
Member
SOA AAA
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: SW Colorado looking South towards the San Juan Mountains
College: IIT Graduate - Math, English, Philosophy
Favorite beer: Fat Tire (or, maybe a bottle of wine) - And Lots of It during these hard times we are now going through!
Posts: 2,077
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Listeria View Post
This very promise of anonymity is what would allow someone to discuss something like having served time for something, or had a conviction expunged, or whatever, without letting this part of an actuary's biography affect his career at all. It's the kind of protection of privacy that Bruce would have appreciated from the parties named in various legal documents in your links. You may feel that the person you were addressing here was abusing the privelege of speaking anonymously (and I truly have no current opinion about their posts), but what you have said to them above is mistaken.
I understand your point and, if that is all people did here, that is, talk about themselves anonymously then I would have no objection or critcism.

But, don't you think that when someone begins accusing another named individual of doing the things he or she would not want said about themselves in public from behind a screen of anonymity that a line has been crossed? I believe that the right or exercise of anonymous speech ought to, at least, follow the Golden Rule.

Therefore, I do think the the person I addressed here has abused a privilege. And, I believe, the moderators of this forum also believe some posters have abused their privilege as well - or posts would not have been deleted.

Honor and integrity has a place and should be expected even in an anonymous post.
__________________
TomB

Tom Bakos, FSA, MAAA
Served as SOA Board member: 2002 - 2005 and (as VP) 2008 - 2010
Reply With Quote
  #105  
Old 09-08-2009, 01:14 PM
Louis Rich
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tbakos View Post
I understand your point and, if that is all people did here, that is, talk about themselves anonymously then I would have no objection or critcism.

But, don't you think that when someone begins accusing another named individual of doing the things he or she would not want said about themselves in public from behind a screen of anonymity that a line has been crossed? I believe that the right or exercise of anonymous speech ought to, at least, follow the Golden Rule.

Therefore, I do think the the person I addressed here has abused a privilege. And, I believe, the moderators of this forum also believe some posters have abused their privilege as well - or posts would not have been deleted.

Honor and integrity has a place and should be expected even in an anonymous post.
Reply With Quote
  #106  
Old 09-08-2009, 01:18 PM
White Castle's Avatar
White Castle White Castle is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: More than 380 restaurants
Posts: 3,275
Default

I'm assuming that IANAL = I Am Not A Lawyer. Since IANAL, I looked up a few terms:

Atrocious Assault and Battery http://dictionary.reference.com/brow...lt+and+battery
–noun Law.
1. an assault involving the actual wounding and maiming of another person.
2. aggravated assault.

Felony http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/felony
–noun, plural -nies. Law.
1. an offense, as murder or burglary, of graver character than those called misdemeanors, esp. those commonly punished in the U.S. by imprisonment for more than a year.
2. Early English Law. any crime punishable by death or mutilation and forfeiture of lands and goods.

Expunge http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/expunge
–verb (used with object)
1. to strike or blot out; erase; obliterate.
2. to efface; wipe out or destroy.
__________________
FSA ~ Fellow Slyder Aficionado
Reply With Quote
  #107  
Old 09-08-2009, 01:20 PM
mlschop's Avatar
mlschop mlschop is offline
Member
SOA
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 36,318
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tbakos View Post
But, don't you think that when someone begins accusing another named individual of doing the things he or she would not want said about themselves in public from behind a screen of anonymity that a line has been crossed? I believe that the right or exercise of anonymous speech ought to, at least, follow the Golden Rule.
Welcome to the internet
Reply With Quote
  #108  
Old 09-08-2009, 01:20 PM
Shaft's Avatar
Shaft Shaft is offline
Member
CAS SOA AAA
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 1,604
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Not Mike View Post
So, if they had "done it right", according to the letter of IL Law, you think Bruce would have accepted the consequences without taking further action? That's pretty naive.
It's irrelevant - if they followed due process they could hold their heads high. Schobel could go and do whatever he pleased but the AAA members would know due process was followed. You call that naive?
Reply With Quote
  #109  
Old 09-08-2009, 01:22 PM
Interesting Post Interesting Post is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 3,243
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by douglan View Post
As many of you know, IANAA so I have little at stake in this mess, other than my hope that this can be resolved with your best interests in mind. While I have met many of you IRL, I consider myself to be a guest here, a fortunate lawyer tolerated by you folks and who considers himself lucky to have a direct connection with the actuarial profession and its members.

AB's post demonstrates why I believe the AAA has failed -- and failed spectacularly -- in handling this matter so far. If actuaries are considering dropping their AAA memberships over this dispute, then it is time for changes to the academy, its board membership, its policy platforms, and its governance procedures.

Like most of you, I have reviewed the court filings as well as the various letters, e-mails and other correspondence provided to date. In addition, I have spoken recently with many of you in private. Nearly all of you expressed concerns over the AAA's handling of this matter. At the heart of this mess, there were -- and there continues to be -- failures to keep you informed and to offer you the opportunity to shape the direction and leadership of your professional organization. This dispute with Bruce seems to be the "perfect storm" of sorts which finally brought these problems with the AAA to the surface.

Having now learned the history and substance of the revelations against Bruce, there is plenty of blame to be levied on both sides of this dispute. If I were Bruce, I would have handled the matter differently and resigned my position as President-elect so as not to damage the profession with the possibility of a protracted and messy lawsuit. I would not have liked to resign, of course, but no single person's objectives are more important than those of the thousands of people who depend on you to keep their best interests in mind. Bruce has made a good argument that he is indeed acting with the profession's best interests in mind. I respect his desire to bring reform to the AAA; however, I don't believe this lawsuit is the way to go about it.

In saying this, I am not excusing, in any way, the failure of the academy to exercise equitable, consistent, and transparent governance procedures. The board was in control of how this matter with Bruce was raised, how it was debated and decided, and how it was communicated to the members. The board failed massively in each of these areas and, in doing so, compromised their obligations to the individual members.

In my view, the next steps would be for members to register formally their concerns with the AAA. Perhaps a "no confidence" letter signed by individual members would spur the AAA to hold a special convention to address your concerns? I'm happy to put together a simple draft as a starting point. Just let me know, or PM me if you would like to discuss privately.
Well put.
Reply With Quote
  #110  
Old 09-08-2009, 01:27 PM
WWSituation's Avatar
WWSituation WWSituation is offline
Member
SOA
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: philadelphia, pa
Favorite beer: Parabola
Posts: 2,836
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tbakos View Post
I understand your point and, if that is all people did here, that is, talk about themselves anonymously then I would have no objection or critcism.

But, don't you think that when someone begins accusing another named individual of doing the things he or she would not want said about themselves in public from behind a screen of anonymity that a line has been crossed? I believe that the right or exercise of anonymous speech ought to, at least, follow the Golden Rule.

Therefore, I do think the the person I addressed here has abused a privilege. And, I believe, the moderators of this forum also believe some posters have abused their privilege as well - or posts would not have been deleted.

Honor and integrity has a place and should be expected even in an anonymous post.
It should be noted that exactuary is NOT an anonymous poster - a simple search will show his willingness to reveal his name. In addition, he is one of the finest posters on the forum. I have seen few people who 'get it' the way he does and he is usually very measured. I'd put my faith in exactuary before Bruce or just about anybody else who posts under their actual name, based only on the content of what is posted here, any day of the week.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duffer View Post
We, the actuarial profession, did several things badly.

1. Pandering - we marketed ourselves as finding clever ways to give the public pension sponsors something for nothing
2. Ignored consequences - we found clever ways to allow politicians to ignore the true costs of benefit increases, like negative amortization of losses
3. Low standards of measurement - GASB had the most simple-minded of standards, and is now only going half-way to raise the standard.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
aaa, bruce schobel

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:16 AM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
*PLEASE NOTE: Posts are not checked for accuracy, and do not
represent the views of the Actuarial Outpost or its sponsors.
Page generated in 0.28107 seconds with 10 queries