Subject: Re: "Parks and Recreation" creator regrets hiring Louis C.K.
Full headers:
X-Received: by with SMTP id n17mr7467272ioc.28.1510361892688;
Fri, 10 Nov 2017 16:58:12 -0800 (PST)
From: shawn <>
Subject: Re: "Parks and Recreation" creator regrets hiring Louis C.K.
Message-ID: <>
References: <> <ou3157$del$> <> <ou4hg2$nnp$> <ou4mfv$liq$>
User-Agent: ForteAgent/
MIME-Version: 1.0
Lines: 56
Organization: Easynews -
X-Complaints-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly.
Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2017 19:58:08 -0500
X-Received-Bytes: 3578
X-Received-Body-CRC: 3901093105
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Original-Bytes: 3434
Print Article
Forward Article
On Fri, 10 Nov 2017 17:09:19 -0000 (UTC), "Adam H. Kerman"<> wrote:

>Obveeus<> wrote:
>>On 11/10/2017 9:40 AM, The Horny Goat wrote:
>>> On Thu, 9 Nov 2017 17:59:09 -0800, Dimensional Traveler
>>><> wrote:
>>>> Honestly, we are rapidly approaching the point where a pissed off ex can
>>>> kill someone's career just by saying they had consensual sex with
>>>> someone but decided years later they didn't like it.  Going to start
>>>> needing NDAs just to break up with someone you are dating.
>>> And based on the Spacey affair must be kept for decades afterwards.
>>> I remember doing things 30 years ago I'd like to take back (NOT in
>>> this department!) but which I barely recall the details of. Guess my
>>> Hollywood career would be over.....there's a vast difference between
>>> Weinstein's misdoings and what's being accused now.
>>The allegation by Anthony Rapp may have put Spacey in the spotlight, but 
>>ultimately what took out Spacey was the same as what is now getting 
>>Louis C.K.   It is a downfall as the result of current workplace 
>>investigations indicating a current, ongoing pattern of impropriety.
>Another misrepresentation by obveeus. Not one of the five women accusing
>Louis C.K. said it happened in the workplace. None was held against her
>will. In some of the cases, he only talked about doing something
>disgusting but didn't follow through.

That's what I don't get about the rush to avoid any connection to
Louis C.K. While the stuff he did was a bit icky I don't recall
anything being brought up that was illegal. It does feel like this is
a case of overkill that is likely only happening because of the
Weinstein originated hysteria.

>Spacey? The workplace stuff, if there was any, could have involved
>actors at the Old Vic, but that had nothing whatsoeve to do with Anthony
>Rapp's accusation. Even most of the Weinstein stuff isn't "workplace".

The problem with Rapp's accusation (and many of the accusations being
made) is there is no way to know what actually happened or even if
anything did happen. If you get enough people (for some definition of
enough) reporting the same thing then it's likely the case that things
happened. At least with Louis C.K. I don't believe he denies what
happened which he would be certain to do if it didn't happen
(especially since he apparently was clearly sober during most of these
reported events.)

>>Now, as to why the current suspension / firing of these men is extending 
>>into retroactively removing their product from the shelves...that sort 
>>of reaction borders on mass hysteria.
>That I agree with.