5 ms·
You have to be careful with the line of reasoning that just because these certain managers and team members are part of a cult that is known to engage in bad ac
by newbie2020 4y ago
You have to be careful with the line of reasoning that just because these certain managers and team members are part of a cult that is known to engage in bad acts, doesn’t mean you can cast the group’s shortcomings upon the individuals (without proof). If that were the case, I can point out a few mainstream religions that condone reprehensible practices, many of whose members you probably work with daily
- whoopdeepoo 4y agoAt what point can you hold people accountable for the actions of the groups they voluntarily associate with?
- ineedasername 4y agoWhen they're part of those actions, like giving themselves a contract for the wine they make.
- ineedasername 4y agoYou can certainly stop them paying themselves hundreds of thousands of dollars by giving themselves contracts as wine vendors.
- rendall 4y agoIt turns out the wine is from a nearby vineyard not at Orange House. The connection is that the person running this vineyard is a former member who used to run the Orange House vineyard before he left.
- GauntletWizard 4y agoThe allegation that the person is a "Former Member" is a valid point to contest. Announcing leaving the cult after a scandal is a good sign, moving to a new winery nearby is pretty neutral, still receiving hundreds of thousands in orders from the cult members is a bad sign. On the balance, probably not enough to convict in a court of law, more than enough for Google to take their own investigation before deciding if they see it as self-dealing.