undefined

points

[-]

If he is actually a bi-furry with an understanding with his wife on 'affairs', do you think he'd say that? Or would he maintain the straight, family-friendly, investor-friendly front expected of him [by some people] in his position?

Don't get me wrong, I'm very much a promoter of monogamy.

I think it is naive to assume that such public statements are the whole truth of a matter.

People who fuck up a company (or have an affair, or get caught snorting drugs off a sex-worker) aren't really 'stepping back to spend more time with their families'. Historically the classic example of executive public statements.

by itishappy58 minutes ago|

parent|

[-]

> If he is actually a bi-furry with an understanding with his wife on 'affairs', do you think he'd say that?

Yes, and it would have helped. CEOs have "exciting" relationships all the time, and folks seem entirely willing to accept this.

These are entirely different stories:

"My wife and I have a non-traditional relationship and would prefer to keep the specifics private, but no harm was caused by my actions."

"I was unfaithful to my wife. My actions hurt her and our children. There is no excuse for what I did. I am deeply sorry."

by dannyw2 hours ago|

parent|

prev|

[-]

People don’t realise that execs don’t actually write these messages usually.

by ImPostingOnHN1 hours ago|

parent|

prev|

[-]

Perhaps, but it's also more common than not for affairs to hurt families, and the statement confirms that applied here.

If you have stronger evidence that the statement was untruthful when it said he hurt his family, you may present it.

Until such time, the statement strengthens the bayesian prior, which is that his affairs hurt his family, and thus that is what we can conclude. We need not be 100% confident to conclude this absent further evidence. >50% confidence suffices.