Only a malignant narcissist thinks he has a "right" to be respected/acknowledged by independent parties.
If the independent parties make a business claim to respect/acknowledge the alleged narcisstst under certain circumstances, then fail to perform on the claim in a way that harms said party, he surely DOES have a right to redress.
If the independent parties make a business claim to respect/acknowledge the alleged narcisstst under certain circumstances, then fail to perform on the claim in a way that harms said party, he surely DOES have a right to redress.
They didn't say "Billy Mitchell absolutely cheated on his perfect Pac-Man game." They did say that since he'd been caught cheating with a few tapes he sent in, everything else COULD be suspect and should be under some level of suspicion. A lot of pro-level team sports don't do that retroactively, probably because cheating was so rampant for a time and the players' unions are strong, and there are a lot more factors at play in a team sport than an individual sport.
It's also totally fair to say that cheaters get expelled and have ALL records, legitimate or not, expunged. There can be totally valid reasons for that -- if you cheat five times and only get caught once, it gives an incentive to cheating because your fraudulent cheats were not caught. But if you get caught once and you lose everything? Then cheating becomes a lot more dangerous.
Disgruntled Narcissists (Score:5, Insightful)
Only a malignant narcissist thinks he has a "right" to be respected/acknowledged by independent parties.
Re: (Score:1)
Only a malignant narcissist thinks he has a "right" to be respected/acknowledged by independent parties.
If the independent parties make a business claim to respect/acknowledge the alleged narcisstst under certain circumstances, then fail to perform on the claim in a way that harms said party, he surely DOES have a right to redress.
Re:Disgruntled Narcissists (Score:2)
If the independent parties make a business claim to respect/acknowledge the alleged narcisstst under certain circumstances, then fail to perform on the claim in a way that harms said party, he surely DOES have a right to redress.
They didn't say "Billy Mitchell absolutely cheated on his perfect Pac-Man game." They did say that since he'd been caught cheating with a few tapes he sent in, everything else COULD be suspect and should be under some level of suspicion. A lot of pro-level team sports don't do that retroactively, probably because cheating was so rampant for a time and the players' unions are strong, and there are a lot more factors at play in a team sport than an individual sport.
It's also totally fair to say that cheaters get expelled and have ALL records, legitimate or not, expunged. There can be totally valid reasons for that -- if you cheat five times and only get caught once, it gives an incentive to cheating because your fraudulent cheats were not caught. But if you get caught once and you lose everything? Then cheating becomes a lot more dangerous.