Secret recording of school board meetings
In a comment on Panda's Thumb, Wesley "Ding" Elsberry wrote,
.
Well, Ding, will these audio recorders pass through metal detectors undetected? Are people going to be frisked or strip-searched at school board meetings to make sure that they are not carrying any hidden audio recorders?
The Darwinists are really going off the deep end.
.
.
One thing that isn’t in the NCSE tips list and should be is that if recording devices are permitted, make sure that someone on the pro-science side is making an audio or audio-plus-video record of such events. Much court wrangling could have been avoided in the Kitzmiller case if there had been a recording of various school board meetings. The board there had a policy of tape-recording meetings and then destroying the recordings after the minutes were accepted, which means that you cannot rely upon the government officials to adequately document and preserve statements made, even if they are making an official recording at the time of the meeting.
I recommend the Olympus voice recorders. I prefer the units that have a jack for an external microphone. They fit in a pocket, the small external microphone I use is unobtrusive, they do well for meetings when set to “conference” sensitivity, and they will record for several hours straight if you put in a fresh battery, meaning that you don’t have to fidget with equipment during a meeting. Another must is the ability to transfer files of recordings directly to a computer via USB, rather than re-recording an output sound. The WS-311M recorder is currently selling for $75 at Newegg. If you can afford a bit more, Olympus has similar units with more memory.
Well, Ding, will these audio recorders pass through metal detectors undetected? Are people going to be frisked or strip-searched at school board meetings to make sure that they are not carrying any hidden audio recorders?
The Darwinists are really going off the deep end.
.
posted by Larry Fafarman | 1/15/2008 11:47:00 PM
14 Comments:
>>>Well, Ding, will these audio recorders pass through metal detectors undetected? Are people going to be frisked or strip-searched at school board meetings to make sure that they are not carrying any hidden audio recorders?<<<
What part of "if recording devices are permitted" don't you understand?
What part of "the small external microphone I use is unobtrusive" don't you understand? If recording devices are permitted, then why the need for stealth? Anyway, if recording devices are not permitted, that is not going to stop Ding Elsberry.
Also, there is nothing wrong with taking a little poetic license.
The reason for stealth is so that you don't make them conscious of the fact that they are being recorded by an outside source. People act differently when they know they are being recorded, especially when the person recording them appears to be in disagreement with their views. This is a well-known phenomenon in social science, and part of the reason why polls need to be carefully constructed to avoid bias.
>>>Anyway, if recording devices are not permitted, that is not going to stop Ding Elsberry.<<<
Unlike you, Wesley is ethical and not a lying sack of shit. By the way, how extensive is your child pornography collection?
"Pro-science side" is misleading Darwinist rhetoric that I've encountered before. There are many different possible definitions of "science," and nobody has a copyright on the word. Everyone is pro-science by their own definition.
Materialists and Darwinists typically think that "science" consists of any form of materialistic speculation that they prefer to indulge in, whether it is empirically verifiable or not.
> Also, there is nothing wrong with taking a little poetic license. <
In other words, you are admitting that you lied.
W. Kevin Vicklund driveled...
>>>>> The reason for stealth is so that you don't make them conscious of the fact that they are being recorded by an outside source. <<<<<<
What? If you want to make them conscious that they are being recorded, you take a big mike and shove it in their faces.
>>>>>> Unlike you, Wesley is ethical and not a lying sack of shit. <<<<<<
Ding Elsberry is a big dunghill like you are.
>>>What? If you want to make them conscious that they are being recorded, you take a big mike and shove it in their faces.<<<
Which is why we don't want to shove a big mike in their face - we don't want to make them conscious of the fact that they are being recorded, just like I said.
If they aren't conscious of being recorded, they are less likely to obfuscate their true motivations. It's all about having admissible evidence in court in the event of a lawsuit. Secretly recording a meeting that doesn't permit recordings is inadmissible in court and thus useless. There's no point in making an inadmissible recording other than for public ridicule.
>>> Materialists and Darwinists typically think that "science" consists of any form of materialistic speculation that they prefer to indulge in, whether it is empirically verifiable or not. <<<
About this UFO ...
Materialist Speculation #1: This is the Civil War USS Monitor, refurbished and refitted.
Materialist Speculation #2: This is a very large cottage cheese container (at least a gallon), refurbished and refitted and painted aluminum color.
Dunno if either of these is "verifiable", but I wouldn't suggest they're science.
>>>>> If they aren't conscious of being recorded, they are less likely to obfuscate their true motivations. <<<<<<
What I meant to say was, if outside recorders are allowed, the people at the school board meetings are going to suspect that they are being recorded, anyway.
It is really dumb to record these school board meetings in the hope of entrapping people.
> What I meant to say was, if outside recorders are allowed, the people at the school board meetings are going to suspect that they are being recorded, anyway. <
They might, but obviously the school board members are not the brightest bulbs.
> It is really dumb to record these school board meetings in the hope of entrapping people. <
What is dumb about it? It succeeded.
Wednesday, January 16, 2008 10:33:00 PM
>>>
It is really dumb to record these school board meetings in the hope of entrapping people.
<<<
Entrapping? That would imply that the persons using the recorders are actively persuading or luring the board members into doing something illegal or contrary to the interests of the public and busting them for it. If the board members are shown to be working for their own selfish agendas by their own free will, religious or otherwise, they should be called out/punished/removed for not serving the interests of the public.
In case you've been hiding your head under a rock (or in Larry's case, had the rock dropped on his head repeatedly), the fundie movement to stop the teaching of evolution thrives on secrecy and vagueness. We've seen in press conferences how fundie board members like Bill Buckingham from Dover justify their creationism/ID promotion actions to the public by saying how it was for the good of the children, the right morale choice, or some other vague statement on how it was the correct decision end of question. An audio recording of the meeting will no doubt reveal the actual intolerant hellfire bullying that pushed through these movements and expose these fundie board members as the thugs they really are. To quote the favorite saying of today's politicians put into power by their large fundie conservative consitutents, "if you're not doing anything wrong, then you've got nothing to hide."
< About this UFO ... >
Um, may we please have the benefit of a non-materialist speculation?
Suggestion:
#3. This is the Intelligent Designer making his rounds.
>>>What I meant to say was, if outside recorders are allowed, the people at the school board meetings are going to suspect that they are being recorded, anyway.<<<
"Familiarity breeds contempt." If it is a long-standing policy, the board is likely to not even think about the fact that a recording might be taken, or the possible consequences.
>>>It is really dumb to record these school board meetings in the hope of entrapping people.<<<
No. What's dumb is to say something on camera, and then lie about it under oath. Unfortunately, opponents of science have a bad habit of saying one thing and then claiming they said something else. A recording is very powerful evidence of what they actually said, and can make a big difference in court cases.
A small correction to what someone else said, even if reording are not allowed of a meeting they can usually be entered into evidence in a civil (i.e. not criminal) court. It's pretty much up to the discression of the judge. Also, most state sunshine laws do allow and sometimes require audio and video records.
if you ignore the whole issue about secretly or not secretly doing the recording, what possible valid reason is there for not allowing recording of "public" meetings? Unless the people involved want to be able to deny and cast doubt on what was actually said.
In our school board every meeting is recorded and posted on the web site for six months. Since they've done that people have gotten a lot more polite and better spoken in the meetings.
Post a Comment
<< Home