Home is not made of CBS as documented

[Lisa Owens]

.....

[Scott Patterson]

Hey there,

A buddy of mine did a home inspection and mitigation for a couple and he documented the home to be made of CBS. He thought it was CBS anyway. The couple then bought the home. The inspector realized the error months later. It is wood and not CBS. What's your thoughts? Big problem or solved easily with no real rescourse from buyers?
Thanks.

What is CBS?

[Ken Rowe]

What is CBS?

Concrete Block Stucco, popular in Fl and GA.

Seems most people prefer it to wood framed stucco, so yes the inspector could be in a world of hurt. Hope his E&O is paid up.

[Ted Menelly]

What is CBS?

NBC, CBS, Fox.....etc

[Jim Luttrall]

I'm wondering why inspectors feel the need to describe the building. Is this part of SOP requirements? We have some requirements in Texas as far as identification of roof covering, water heater fuel and size, furnace fuel and type but not this. If not required or pertinent to the condition of the house, why put it in the report?

[Scott Patterson]

Hey there,

A buddy of mine did a home inspection and mitigation for a couple and he documented the home to be made of CBS. He thought it was CBS anyway. The couple then bought the home. The inspector realized the error months later. It is wood and not CBS. What's your thoughts? Big problem or solved easily with no real rescourse from buyers?
Thanks.

Well now I know what CBS is. Concrete Block Stucco. OK, your friend ID the home as a CBS when in fact it is a wood frame construction with a stucco cladding, correct?

I would think that the insurance for a CBS home would be less than a wood frame home. This could be a big issue in FL.

Was it the buyers who discovered the discrepancy? If so, I would think that they are a little peeved at this moment.

What made your friend ID it as CBS and not a frame with stucco?

If the home was listed on MLS or anther service how was the cladding described? Was it listed as a CBS home or wood frame with stucco?

So many ways this could go.....

[Ted Menelly]

Hm


Scott, Scott, Scott


I was thinking by what was said that is was a wood sided home and not a stucco home. I guess one should never assume because of you know why.

[James Duffin]

It is part of the SOP in NC...


.1106 STRUCTURAL COMPONENTS
(a) The home inspector shall inspect structural components including:
(1) Foundation;
(2) Floors;
(3) Walls;
(4) Columns or piers;
(5) Ceilings; and
(6) Roofs.

(b) The home inspector shall describe the type of:
(1) Foundation;
(2) Floor structure;
(3) Wall structure;
(4) Columns or piers;
(5) Ceiling structure; and
(6) Roof structure.

[Jim Luttrall]

Hey there,

A buddy of mine did a home inspection and mitigation for a couple and he documented the home to be made of CBS. He thought it was CBS anyway. The couple then bought the home. The inspector realized the error months later. It is wood and not CBS. What's your thoughts? Big problem or solved easily with no real rescourse from buyers?
Thanks.
Depending on the circumstances, come clean, explain the mistake.
The real damage is dependent on whether the clients bought or would not have bought the house based on the discrepancy. Might not have been an issue since there is no "repair" and they may not have relied on that description. If they did rely on the description and would not have bought it... get out the checkbook.

[Ted Menelly]

It is part of the SOP in NC...


.1106 STRUCTURAL COMPONENTS
(a) The home inspector shall inspect structural components including:
(1) Foundation;
(2) Floors;
(3) Walls;
(4) Columns or piers;
(5) Ceilings; and
(6) Roofs.

(b) The home inspector shall describe the type of:
(1) Foundation;
(2) Floor structure;
(3) Wall structure;
(4) Columns or piers;
(5) Ceiling structure; and
(6) Roof structure.



Isn't there something about describing every wall covering in ever room such as wallpaper or textured finished drywall or painted plaster, paneling etc

[James Duffin]

No wallpaper....see below....but to save time here is the link to the WHOLE SOP.

http://www.ncdoi.com/OSFM/Engineering/HILB/Documents/HomeInspectorLicensureActStatutesandRulesApril1201 0.pdf

.1113 INTERIORS
(a) The home inspector shall inspect:
(1) Walls, ceiling, and floors;
(2) Steps, stairways, balconies, and railings;
(3) Counters and a representative number of built-in cabinets; and
(4) A representative number of doors and windows.

(b) The home inspector shall:
(1) Operate a representative number of windows and interior doors; and
(2) Report signs of water penetration into the building or signs of abnormal or harmful condensation on building components.

(c) The home inspector is not required to inspect:
(1) Paint, wallpaper, and other finish treatments on the interior walls, ceilings, and floors;
(2) Carpeting; or
(3) Draperies, blinds, or other window treatments

[Dom D'Agostino]

Hey there,

A buddy of mine did a home inspection and mitigation for a couple and he documented the home to be made of CBS. He thought it was CBS anyway. The couple then bought the home. The inspector realized the error months later. It is wood and not CBS. What's your thoughts? Big problem or solved easily with no real rescourse from buyers?
Thanks.


There's a huge difference between CMU and Wood Frame construction. It's fairly obvious, too. If your buddy didn't know the difference, he shouldn't be inspecting or offering mitigation for a fee.

Down here the insurance rates (and termite activity) are tied to construction type. Some folks simply won't buy wood frame because of the issues.

Dom.

[Jerry Peck]

What is CBS?


Concrete Block Stucco,


No, CBS means Concrete Block Structure.

It may, or may not, have stucco on it. MANY CBS homes are simply painted (yes, nothing on the concrete block other than paint), but that was only from back in the days when masons were actually masons and they could, would, and did lay block properly.

I had a CBS house in Gainesville, Florida back in 1971 which was made from 'special' concrete block made in Ocala with the yellowish sand Ocala was known for at the time, the block was simply called Ocala Block, and they never needed painting or any exterior maintenance - the block was left bare, and there were never any leaks. That was when they could actually build houses properly - but construction work started going down to the pits in the late 1970s and has been done there ever since.

[Gabe S]

Just curious if you know how he realized the error months later? It just seems odd to all of a sudden pop up in his head....Wait a minute...that house I inspected three months ago...I think it is actually wood frame...and not block. Damn. How would he even know his error without reinspecting the house?

Sounds like a big mistake to me since there is a big difference between wood frame and brick. That would be one of the major things I would want to know if I was buying a house. If you took two houses that were identical here in Brooklyn, but one was wood and the other brick, the brick one would cost about 10% more money or more.

[Ken Rowe]

What is CBS?


Concrete Block Stucco, popular in Fl and GA.


No, CBS means Concrete Block Structure.


Exactly. CBS, concrete block stucco.


It's a regional thing JP. Not typical building terminology.

[H.G. Watson, Sr.]

If your buddy asked me for advice on this issue I would recommend he review his Insurance policy(ies), discuss this with his legal advisor/attorney, make any necessary reports and disclosures he/they deem appropriate.

[Matt Fellman]

what could a report/disclosure do for him now?

It seems the couple might have had a home inspection by an unlicensed inspector done before my buddy came in.

The couple called my buddy in to finish up and do the mitigation since the unlicensed person could not. If the unlicensed inspector caught this and made notes of it being wood, could this help? Maybe it would not matter bc he was unlicensed?

Yikes.... "cleaning up" after another inspector is never a good idea.... IMO that's the biggest mistake of all. Especially, someone who is not licensed.

[Ken Rowe]

If your "buddy" took the "notes" from an unlicensed home inspector and included them in his report that's worse than mis-identifying it in the first place. His insurance probably won't cover him. It went from a classic Errors and Omissions case to willful neglect. (http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/willful-neglect.html)

[Ken Rowe]

I think they are different reports. One was a "home inspection" by an unlicensed inspector. The second was a "mitigation inspection" for insurance, done by my friend.

You think my friend is deep in the hole here?


As Jim previously stated:
The real damage is dependent on whether the clients bought or would not have bought the house based on the discrepancy. Might not have been an issue since there is no "repair" and they may not have relied on that description. If they did rely on the description and would not have bought it... get out the checkbook.

Here in MN the clients would also have to show a monetary loss I believe. Which could be anything including higher insurance premiums to lower resale value, etc.

[Ted Menelly]

Oh dear

Lisa Owens is departed


I wonder why I saw that coming?????????

[Gabe S]

Can someone please explain why the original post was deleted?

[Paul Kondzich]

Can someone please explain why the original post was deleted?

Because Lisa deleted it.

[Steve Frederickson]

It's a regional thing JP. Not typical building terminology.

In my neck of the woods, it's referred to as CMU (concrete masonry units).

[Vern Heiler]

Because Lisa deleted it.

Let this be a lesson to us all. If you don't want something on this board forever, be sure nobody quotes you!

[H.G. Watson, Sr.]

"She" also changed profile location info FROM Florida TO Georgia.

For the reader that missed the real-time posts: if you review the few posts which were quoted or partially quoted, it sort of "speaks for itself", doesn't it?

My guess is concern relative to litigation. Perhaps there was no "buddy" (subject inspector him/herself or significant other of same) and the OP was "testing the waters" as to potential responsibility, license/livelyhood status, etc. and is fearful the post might be traced back, or possibly was reversing roles and testing the water from the opposite legal position, and similarly fearful the post would be discovered.

The intermediate unquoted posts included some excuse for the "buddy" having been in a hurry, set the event at having been relatively recent, and included a signed report from the "buddy" having been sent directly to the buyer/owner's insurer at the completion of the so-called "mitigation work". Since location originally "florida" I took it to imply buddy was/is a "wind mitigator".

[Gabe S]

"She" also changed profile location info FROM Florida TO Georgia.

For the reader that missed the real-time posts: if you review the few posts which were quoted or partially quoted, it sort of "speaks for itself", doesn't it?

My guess is concern relative to litigation. Perhaps there was no "buddy" (subject inspector him/herself or significant other of same) and the OP was "testing the waters" as to potential responsibility, license/livelyhood status, etc. and is fearful the post might be traced back, or possibly was reversing roles and testing the water from the opposite legal position, and similarly fearful the post would be discovered.

The intermediate unquoted posts included some excuse for the "buddy" having been in a hurry, set the event at having been relatively recent, and included a signed report from the "buddy" having been sent directly to the buyer/owner's insurer at the completion of the so-called "mitigation work". Since location originally "florida" I took it to imply buddy was/is a "wind mitigator".

I was thinking the same thing from the first post. How often do you hear "a friend of mine...." Please, don't make me laugh.

I mean it was kind of a loaded question anyway. "I made a huge mistake:eek: , will I be responsible for it?" Umm...Let me see...I'm thinking about it....YES! YOU WILL BE!:D

[Michael Chambers]

Interesting thread! By the way, what is a "wind mitigator"? I haven't heard that one.

Thanks!

[Vern Heiler]

Interesting thread! By the way, what is a "wind mitigator"? I haven't heard that one.

Thanks!
There was a movie about them a few years ago. "Wind Talkers" I think :D .

[Jerry Peck]

In my neck of the woods, it's referred to as CMU (concrete masonry units).

CMU is the correct terminology for each unit, CBS is a common terminology among the laypersons for describing a structure of CMUs as CBS references the 'structure' and not just the 'units'.

[H.G. Watson, Sr.]

Interesting thread! By the way, what is a "wind mitigator"? I haven't heard that one.

Thanks!



Big Wind/Hurricane/Storm Mitigation Verification Inspection/Certification/Certificate Ammendment/Endorsement to your Insurance Policy.

"wind mitigator"

Its local (Florida) slang for a licensed (state certified or county registered) contractor (General, Building, or Residential - as applicable) who performs Uniform Mitigation Verification Inspections, certifies them, and as a "mitigaTOR" performs remediation work (directly or indirectly via employee) to the structure so as to "qualify" it for a certification to Florida Building Codes to sufficiently resist forces so as to qualify for a discount.

The Certification is submitted to the property insurance carrier, and if the property is qualified, receives a discount regarding hurricane coverage. The certification is also as to the location of the property, and the property owner counter-certifies the inspection. The Certification becomes part of your Insurance Policy, and has to be repeated after a loss event/damage, modification of the structure, change of ownership (change of insurance carrier?), or every five years.

Wind/Hurricane Mitigation Inspections and certifications can also be performed by certified Building code inspectors, licensed professional architects, licensed professional engineers, or any other indivdual or entity recognized by the insurer as possessing the "necessary qualifications to properly complete" the "form". There was a State program the "My Safe Florida Home" which certified other Hurricane mitigation inspectors and provided free inspections to home owners, I believe it "sunset" last summer.

The form requires identification of the wall construction type for all exterior walls of the structure and percentages for each as:
Wood Frame, Un-Reinforced Masonary, Reinforced Masonary, Poured Concrete, or Other (with description), and whether or not there is Secondary Water Resistance, amongst numerous other things, not specifically on topic to the original (now deleted but oft quoted) post.

Perhaps now will make sense to the reader why I first posted as I did (if my hypothetcal buddy asked me, I'd advise to consult his legal advisor/attorney ....,) and not just call your GL/E&O agent and report/disclose. (I'm sure many HIs here were thinking "there goes H.G. all wrong").

This is how the Mitigation Certification is worded:


An individual or entity who knowingly provides or utters a false or fraudulent mitigation verification form with the intent to obtain or receive a discount on an insurance premium to which the individual or entity is not entitled commits a misdemeanor of the first degree (Section 627.711(3), Florida Statutes). The Qualified Inspector who certifies this form is strictly liable for all acts, statements, concealment of facts, omissions, and documentation provided by his or her employee who actually performed the inspection.

Just sitting back and signing for non-trained, unlicensed sub-contractors for a "cut", could be much more than simple mistake, error, ommission or negligence claim, loss of contractors license, could be criminal, don't know, may be, maybe should be. Doing a drive by and certifying a personal hands-on, eyeballs in the attic, all over the property, is.

[Steve Frederickson]

CMU is the correct terminology for each unit, CBS is a common terminology among the laypersons for describing a structure of CMUs as CBS references the 'structure' and not just the 'units'.

A wall made up of wood studs is still referred to as a wood stud wall. I've been a P.E for 25 years and never heard it referred to as CBS. I've always referred to it, and heard it referred to, as a CMU wall, but I'm always happy to learn something. I'll start calling it CBS around here, just to see how many eyebrows are raised. I'm betting that it's a regional thing.

[H.G. Watson, Sr.]

A wall made up of wood studs is still referred to as a wood stud wall. I've been a P.E for 25 years and never heard it referred to as CBS. I've always referred to it, and heard it referred to, as a CMU wall, but I'm always happy to learn something. I'll start calling it CBS around here, just to see how many eyebrows are raised. I'm betting that it's a regional thing.

Steve Frederickson,

You likely missed out on the now deleted posts (only one and a part of one were ever quoted, therefore preserved).

The now missing posts told the story. "She" also revised/edited first and second posts prior to deleting them.



Basically, the story went:
The structure was wood framed (with stucco) ,
The Hurricane/Wind Mitigation Inspector (and/or "mitigator") certified :
The structure was masonary Concrete Block Structure/CMU (with stucco). Because "he" was too busy that day, excuse, excuse, and "now" over three months later just "realized" "his mistake".
The poster when asked what "she" meant by CBS first defined it as Concrete Block Stucco, then clarified Concrete Block Structure with Stucco.

Wether or not it was actually stucco or other finish system was never addressed in the dialogue before "she" deleted her posts and removed the content of the original post.

[Jerry Peck]

I've been a P.E for 25 years and never heard it referred to as CBS.

I'm betting that it's a regional thing.


It may be "regional", as in "all of Florida" as I have heard it "all over Florida" where I've been (which is all over Florida).

Not sure it is extends up into Georgia or not, but it is all over Florida.

cbs wall construction - Google Search (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=cbs+wall+construction&aq=0&aqi=g1&aql=&oq=cbs+wall+&gs_rfai)=

[Rich Goeken]

Oh dear

Lisa Owens is departed


I wonder why I saw that coming?????????


I would love to be a fly on the wall when "her friend" realizes the full ramifications of the "error".

This may have been covered in her missing posts, but from my experience the thickness of a wall using concrete block and stucco, is usually much thicker than a wood frame wall. If that was missed, and discovered a few months later, one wonders what else was "missed".

[Scott Patterson]

Any bets that this might be her.....
Orlando FL Real Estate, Orange County FL Homes, Miami FL Investment Property - Gould Company (http://gouldandcompany.net/agents_details.php?agent_ID=6663)

[Elliot Franson]

From: Concrete masonry unit - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concrete_masonry_unit)


Concrete block, when reinforced with concrete columns (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Columns) and tie beams (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beam_(structure)), is a very common building material for the load-bearing (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Load-bearing) walls of buildings, in what is termed "concrete block structure" (CBS) construction. Concrete block, when reinforced with concrete columns (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Columns) and tie beams (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beam_(structure)), is a very common building material for the load-bearing (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Load-bearing) walls of buildings, in what is termed "concrete block structure" (CBS) construction.

[Richard Soundy]

Scott,

I am not sure on your motifs regarding the last post? What is the point?

As I view this thread, a person asked a personal question regarding something that could become an issue to them (buddy included) and career. They recieved good answers from experts in this field. They then concluded from the answers that this SHOULD HAVE been an "Off-the-record" thing, hense the attempt to remove the potential evidence that may be held against her/buddy. Personally, nothing wrong here...

Perhaps, those who have quoted her in their posts might consider editing (removing) the quotes. How often have you seeked "off the record" advice??

Just my opinion
Regards - Richard

[Scott Patterson]

Scott,

I am not sure on your motifs regarding the last post? What is the point?

As I view this thread, a person asked a personal question regarding something that could become an issue to them (buddy included) and career. They recieved good answers from experts in this field. They then concluded from the answers that this SHOULD HAVE been an "Off-the-record" thing, hense the attempt to remove the potential evidence that may be held against her/buddy. Personally, nothing wrong here...

Perhaps, those who have quoted her in their posts might consider editing (removing) the quotes. How often have you seeked "off the record" advice??

Just my opinion
Regards - Richard

Motive? I have none other than to eat a nice watermelon today!

I seek advice all the time from knowledgeable individuals, I even pay for it if needed. Folks should realize that a public board is not the place to seek advice if you do not want it to be out in the open for all to see.

Glad you have an opine on this, that is what make the United States the best country in the World. We are all welcome to an opinion.

[chris mcintyre]

Any bets that this might be her.....
Orlando FL Real Estate, Orange County FL Homes, Miami FL Investment Property - Gould Company (http://gouldandcompany.net/agents_details.php?agent_ID=6663)

Well done Scott! I was thinking this was the homeowner, but a Realtor fits perfectly, and would bet you a dollar to a donut that's her.

Also thanks to HG for filling in the blanks on a couple of the deleted post.

Lastly I think anyone who comes here signs up and starts a thread, gets what they want and tries to erase their tracks is owed nothing by the other members. Actually I think the thousands of other members that take the time to read a thread should not have their time wasted by an OP that has deleted their post.

I have made more than my share of post that were wrong, inaccurate, misspellings...(ok that's enough :)) , they can be embarrassing, but I don't delete them because I know how frustrating it is to try following a thread with deleted post.

[H.G. Watson, Sr.]

You're welcome C.M.

I wouldn't put too much credance in the user name selected by the now M.I.A. OP.

I'm going to have to check out the price of a Krispy Kreme. IIRC last time I (sneakily) induldged I think a single donut cost more than a buck with tax, not so sure that's a good bet.;)

[John Kogel]

Lastly I think anyone who comes here signs up and starts a thread, gets what they want and tries to erase their tracks is owed nothing by the other members. Actually I think the thousands of other members that take the time to read a thread should not have their time wasted by an OP that has deleted their post. That is a valid point, but put yourself in the OP's shoes for a sec.

I have made inquiries here, many of us have, while the property in question was in the process of either being bought or rejected by my clients. I see no problem with deleting sensitive info that could harm someone's credibility or damage their rep somehow if it falls into the hands of some law shark. The poster realizes they've made an error and asks for privacy. In that case, I think it would be fair to the OP to grant them that privacy, nothing wrong with that.


I have made more than my share of post that were wrong, inaccurate, misspelling, they can be embarrassing, but I don't delete them because I know how frustrating it is to try following a thread with deleted posts.You can edit anytime, and that is always a good way to keep the thread coherent, without giving off sensitive details. JMO

[Ted Menelly]

Well done Scott! I was thinking this was the homeowner, but a Realtor fits perfectly, and would bet you a dollar to a donut that's her.

Also thanks to HG for filling in the blanks on a couple of the deleted post.

Lastly I think anyone who comes here signs up and starts a thread, gets what they want and tries to erase their tracks is owed nothing by the other members. Actually I think the thousands of other members that take the time to read a thread should not have their time wasted by an OP that has deleted their post.

I have made more than my share of post that were wrong, inaccurate, misspellings...(ok that's enough :)) , they can be embarrassing, but I don't delete them because I know how frustrating it is to try following a thread with deleted post.


Hm, well, um, I never screw up or make mistakes. You must have had a recent brain hemorrhage :D You are a home inspector and we know they never make mistakes.

[Michael Chambers]

Big Wind/Hurricane/Storm Mitigation Verification Inspection/Certification/Certificate Ammendment/Endorsement to your Insurance Policy.

"wind mitigator"

Its local (Florida) slang for a licensed (state certified or county registered) contractor (General, Building, or Residential - as applicable) who performs Uniform Mitigation Verification Inspections, certifies them, and as a "mitigaTOR" performs remediation work (directly or indirectly via employee) to the structure so as to "qualify" it for a certification to Florida Building Codes to sufficiently resist forces so as to qualify for a discount.
.................................................. ....
A very thorough and informative explanation!

Thanks a lot H.G. I appreciate being so well edjumacated! :D

[chris mcintyre]

That is a valid point, but put yourself in the OP's shoes for a sec.

I have made inquiries here, many of us have, while the property in question was in the process of either being bought or rejected by my clients. I see no problem with deleting sensitive info that could harm someone's credibility or damage their rep somehow if it falls into the hands of some law shark. The poster realizes they've made an error and asks for privacy. In that case, I think it would be fair to the OP to grant them that privacy, nothing wrong with that.


This is also a valid point, but to me (I am not trying to speak for anyone else) the difference is, if you or anyone else here that is honest and upfront asked others to delete quoted post I would be more than happy to do so.

If on the other hand you come here and feel you have to be misleading and not be honest about who you are to get the very knowledgeable and generous members to answer your questions, then yes I have a problem with that.

This of course is assuming that this person is actually a realtor, we do they were misleading because of the profile changes they made, also I am not aware of them asking for privacy or asking the others to delete the quoted post.

[Gabe S]

Any bets that this might be her.....
Orlando FL Real Estate, Orange County FL Homes, Miami FL Investment Property - Gould Company (http://gouldandcompany.net/agents_details.php?agent_ID=6663)

This post was a low blow. Not necessary.

[Ken Rowe]

Scott,

I am not sure on your motifs regarding the last post? What is the point?

As I view this thread, a person asked a personal question regarding something that could become an issue to them (buddy included) and career. They recieved good answers from experts in this field. They then concluded from the answers that this SHOULD HAVE been an "Off-the-record" thing, hense the attempt to remove the potential evidence that may be held against her/buddy. Personally, nothing wrong here...

Perhaps, those who have quoted her in their posts might consider editing (removing) the quotes. How often have you seeked "off the record" advice??

Just my opinion
Regards - Richard

Scott and I were the first two to respond to the OP. You can look at the thread and see where I answered several of her questions. At no time did the OP EVER say she was involved or had ANY personal involvement with this situation. In fact, she continuously stated it was her "buddy". At no time did the original poster ask that any of our responses be OFF THE RECORD. Nor did she ever ask anyone to remove our responses. In fact the original poster came across (to me anyhow) as somewhat shady and most likely involved in the situation somehow.

Why on earth would I want to remove anything that I quoted from the OP? If I ever wanted "off the record advice" I certainly wouldn't post my questions on an open forum.

[Vern Heiler]

Chung asked Ms. Gingrich to "just whisper it to me, just between you and me,"


Done all the time Ken:D

[Ken Rowe]

Chung asked Ms. Gingrich to "just whisper it to me, just between you and me,"


Done all the time Ken:D


I had to google it 'cause I had no idea what you were talking about :)


In a January 5, 1995 interview with Kathleen Gingrich, mother of Republican (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republican_Party_%28United_States%29) politician Newt Gingrich (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newt_Gingrich), on Eye to Eye, Ms. Gingrich said she could not say what her son thought about First Lady (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Lady_of_the_United_States) Hillary Clinton (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillary_Clinton) on the air. Chung asked Ms. Gingrich to "just whisper it to me, just between you and me," and Ms. Gingrich replied that her son thought of Clinton as a "bitch". Many people interpreted Chung's suggestion that if Ms. Gingrich would whisper this statement it would be promised that the statement would be off the record. Bill Carter for the New York Times reported, "Ms. Chung had become the object of some of the most ferocious criticism, justified or not, ever directed at any network anchor as a result of her now infamous interview with Speaker Newt Gingrich's mother, Kathleen."

[Rich Goeken]

Scott,


Perhaps, those who have quoted her in their posts might consider editing (removing) the quotes. How often have you seeked "off the record" advice??

Just my opinion
Regards - Richard


Wrongo.... Let me see if I understand your concept. I sign-up to participate in an open forum and ask questions. (The one comment in the posters messages reminded me back when I was a teenager and buying condoms----they were always "For my friend!" Ya... sure.)


A discussion ensues, with responsive and helpful comments..... The person apparently chances facts on previously posted material. The person apparently chances where they are located. The person then apparently removes all his/her messages. We are left with half of a informative discussion. I am using apparently because I don't know what was said by this person, who the person was, why they were a sneak.


And you see nothing wrong with this because........


Once in a while we jump the gun, it is pointed out to us, an apology is issued, and the information continues to flow. I find this person's conduct despicable and it leaves a sour taste in my mouth. I have seen a few like this in the past.

Personally I would prefer it if the moderator would lock posts so they could not be deleted. This could be noted when you join. If you don't like it--don't post! Then all the comments posted on a subject would make sense to someone who was attempting to research information on a topic that had been posted in the past.


Just my opinion
Rich