Internet Party Photos and the NDHSAA Ineligibility Rules

A place for all other topics related to North Dakota high schools, and athletics.
Forum rules
Please do not post just to complain about players, coaches, teams, officials, fans, or anyone else. Lets all try to demonstrate the spirit of good sportsmanship. Posts may be edited or deleted that do not comply.

Re: Internet Party Photos and the NDHSAA Ineligibility Rules

Postby Makotifarmguy » Mon Dec 03, 2007 10:11 am

You have 18 years to have fun, be involved in almost anything you want to be involved in.

Once you turn 21, you have the rest of your life to drink (if you so choose).

Why ruin those 1st 18 years by drinking??? :?
"Take the bull by the horns"
User avatar
Makotifarmguy
NDPreps Starter
 
Posts: 148
Joined: Tue Oct 30, 2007 9:01 am
Location: Middle of the Prairie

Re: Internet Party Photos and the NDHSAA Ineligibility Rules

Postby fbinnd » Mon Dec 03, 2007 11:15 am

This is so amazingly simple. If you don't want to get suspended, don't go to a party where there is alcohol or tobacco. If you go and see alcohol or tobacco, leave. If you stay and the party is busted, or if someone takes your picture and shows it to the administration, you're done. Period.

But, if you're a student, find something else to do with your pathetic life instead of snapping pictures of students and e-mailing them to administrators. If I were the administrator, I would require the person who took the photo to at least identify themselves to the school. Maybe the threat of becoming a social outcast would keep people from tattling on other people.
fbinnd
 

Re: Internet Party Photos and the NDHSAA Ineligibility Rules

Postby baller01 » Wed Dec 05, 2007 8:43 pm

Plain and simple, it isn't substantial evidence. In this day and age, pictures mean absoutely nothing. How does a picture PROVE that a person was drinking or even there. Sure, 99.9% of the time a picture is going to be ledgit, but unless a cop came and gave you a breathalizer, or you were in a vechile with alcohol, something like that, I don't know how else you can prove for 100% they were there.

For all you people that don't agree with this, put yourself in a situation like this. Say your job requires you to stay out of bars. Some guy that is jealous of your business position finds a picture of some people in a bar and superimposes you into that position and you get fired. Now what do you think of the situation? A picture shows nothing. People say a picture is worth a thousand words, however, those words are not always the truth.
Winning isn't everything--but wanting to win is. -Vince Lombardi
User avatar
baller01
NDPreps Hall of Fame
 
Posts: 1542
Joined: Sat Dec 16, 2006 12:28 pm

Re: Internet Party Photos and the NDHSAA Ineligibility Rules

Postby luvmy3gbb1wr » Wed Dec 05, 2007 11:33 pm

baller01 wrote:Plain and simple, it isn't substantial evidence. In this day and age, pictures mean absoutely nothing. How does a picture PROVE that a person was drinking or even there. Sure, 99.9% of the time a picture is going to be ledgit, but unless a cop came and gave you a breathalizer, or you were in a vechile with alcohol, something like that, I don't know how else you can prove for 100% they were there.

For all you people that don't agree with this, put yourself in a situation like this. Say your job requires you to stay out of bars. Some guy that is jealous of your business position finds a picture of some people in a bar and superimposes you into that position and you get fired. Now what do you think of the situation? A picture shows nothing. People say a picture is worth a thousand words, however, those words are not always the truth.


Yeah, but i'm not an underage teenager.......quit trying to justify
luvmy3gbb1wr
NDPreps All-Conference
 
Posts: 323
Joined: Wed Mar 21, 2007 3:01 am
Location: North Dakota USA

Re: Internet Party Photos and the NDHSAA Ineligibility Rules

Postby baseball » Wed Dec 05, 2007 11:44 pm

luvmy3gbb1wr wrote:
baller01 wrote:Plain and simple, it isn't substantial evidence. In this day and age, pictures mean absoutely nothing. How does a picture PROVE that a person was drinking or even there. Sure, 99.9% of the time a picture is going to be ledgit, but unless a cop came and gave you a breathalizer, or you were in a vechile with alcohol, something like that, I don't know how else you can prove for 100% they were there.

For all you people that don't agree with this, put yourself in a situation like this. Say your job requires you to stay out of bars. Some guy that is jealous of your business position finds a picture of some people in a bar and superimposes you into that position and you get fired. Now what do you think of the situation? A picture shows nothing. People say a picture is worth a thousand words, however, those words are not always the truth.


Yeah, but i'm not an underage teenager.......quit trying to justify


I can see that you didnt understand what he said. he said that the person wasnt even at the bar and yet the pictures made it seem like he was. his connection there was that if a person has a big enough motive and enough computer savy he can take a picture of an underage teenager and put him in a party with a beer can in his hand when in reality he wasnt even there.
Pay Heed, All Who Enter: Beware of "The Phog"
baseball
NDPreps Legend
 
Posts: 4641
Joined: Sat Mar 25, 2006 5:53 pm

Re: Internet Party Photos and the NDHSAA Ineligibility Rules

Postby dtvman » Thu Dec 06, 2007 1:57 am

baller01 wrote:Plain and simple, it isn't substantial evidence. In this day and age, pictures mean absoutely nothing. How does a picture PROVE that a person was drinking or even there. Sure, 99.9% of the time a picture is going to be ledgit, but unless a cop came and gave you a breathalizer, or you were in a vechile with alcohol, something like that, I don't know how else you can prove for 100% they were there.

For all you people that don't agree with this, put yourself in a situation like this. Say your job requires you to stay out of bars. Some guy that is jealous of your business position finds a picture of some people in a bar and superimposes you into that position and you get fired. Now what do you think of the situation? A picture shows nothing. People say a picture is worth a thousand words, however, those words are not always the truth.


These two statements contradict each other. Using your number I would say 99.9% of the time pictures mean everything. That's pretty substantial evidence. I still think an administrator would try to get more proof, but I think a picture is still pretty reliable evidence.
dtvman
 

Re: Internet Party Photos and the NDHSAA Ineligibility Rules

Postby baseball » Thu Dec 06, 2007 2:34 am

dtvman wrote:
baller01 wrote:Plain and simple, it isn't substantial evidence. In this day and age, pictures mean absoutely nothing. How does a picture PROVE that a person was drinking or even there. Sure, 99.9% of the time a picture is going to be ledgit, but unless a cop came and gave you a breathalizer, or you were in a vechile with alcohol, something like that, I don't know how else you can prove for 100% they were there.

For all you people that don't agree with this, put yourself in a situation like this. Say your job requires you to stay out of bars. Some guy that is jealous of your business position finds a picture of some people in a bar and superimposes you into that position and you get fired. Now what do you think of the situation? A picture shows nothing. People say a picture is worth a thousand words, however, those words are not always the truth.


These two statements contradict each other. Using your number I would say 99.9% of the time pictures mean everything. That's pretty substantial evidence. I still think an administrator would try to get more proof, but I think a picture is still pretty reliable evidence.


how do they contridict each other?? in the first statement he said that pictures mean nothing and the second statement he gave an example of that. the picture that was taken at the bar that the employee was superimposed in is an example a picture meaning nothing. if you only saw the picture it would look like this guy is partying it up at the bar when in reality he is at home sitting on the couch watching tv or something. just because 99.9% of pictures are legit doesnt meant 99.9% of the truth is in them pictures.
Pay Heed, All Who Enter: Beware of "The Phog"
baseball
NDPreps Legend
 
Posts: 4641
Joined: Sat Mar 25, 2006 5:53 pm

Re: Internet Party Photos and the NDHSAA Ineligibility Rules

Postby dtvman » Thu Dec 06, 2007 4:09 am

baseball wrote:
dtvman wrote:
baller01 wrote:Plain and simple, it isn't substantial evidence. In this day and age, pictures mean absoutely nothing. How does a picture PROVE that a person was drinking or even there. Sure, 99.9% of the time a picture is going to be ledgit, but unless a cop came and gave you a breathalizer, or you were in a vechile with alcohol, something like that, I don't know how else you can prove for 100% they were there.

For all you people that don't agree with this, put yourself in a situation like this. Say your job requires you to stay out of bars. Some guy that is jealous of your business position finds a picture of some people in a bar and superimposes you into that position and you get fired. Now what do you think of the situation? A picture shows nothing. People say a picture is worth a thousand words, however, those words are not always the truth.


These two statements contradict each other. Using your number I would say 99.9% of the time pictures mean everything. That's pretty substantial evidence. I still think an administrator would try to get more proof, but I think a picture is still pretty reliable evidence.


how do they contridict each other?? in the first statement he said that pictures mean nothing and the second statement he gave an example of that. the picture that was taken at the bar that the employee was superimposed in is an example a picture meaning nothing. if you only saw the picture it would look like this guy is partying it up at the bar when in reality he is at home sitting on the couch watching tv or something. just because 99.9% of pictures are legit doesnt meant 99.9% of the truth is in them pictures.

pictures mean absoutely nothing. 99.9% of the time a picture is going to be ledgit
THESE 2 STATEMENTS. If a picture is legit and it hasn't been touched then it is what it is. There is no lies in a picture that hasn't been touched. If 99.9% haven't been touched then 99.9% mean exactly what they show. An undoctored picture doesn't lie. Administrators have to base decisions on something. A person could just as easily say someone was at a party. Should they just ignore hearsay as well? If that was the case virtually nobody would ever be suspended. It has been said over and over, the best way to avoid this is to just stay away from a situation that could get you in trouble. I am tired of people complaining that just because they don't like the rules, they don't think they should apply to them. If six weeks missing a high school activity is the worst thing that happens to you from drinking, you should consider yourself lucky.
dtvman
 

Re: Internet Party Photos and the NDHSAA Ineligibility Rules

Postby Hinsa » Thu Dec 06, 2007 7:03 am

I'm right there with you, dtvman. The statements DO contradict each other.

And I don't think any administrator is going to suspend someone solely off the basis of a picture. There would be an investigation and a logical decision made based on the weight of the evidence. Questions like "Where were you that night?" and "Who can verify your whereabouts?" will support/refute the photo. And trained investigators will know when someone is lieing when questioned - they watch body language clues and they can tell instantly if someone is telling the truth.

As for altering pictures, how many people have the skills to REALLY superimpose someone into a picture without being able to tell the difference? There are things like shadows, lighting angles, color variations, etc. that give away that a picture has been altered when you really examine the picture.

And if 99.9% of pictures are legit, that means that only 0.1% are fake. 99.9% accuracy would stand up in most courtrooms when supported by other evidence.

A question - have you EVER, EVER, heard of someone being suspended solely based on a photo that has been altered? I think we are arguing about a situation that has never even occurred.
Twins and Vikings Forever!
User avatar
Hinsa
NDPreps Legend
 
Posts: 2028
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 4:53 am
Location: THE Red River Valley Conference

Re: Internet Party Photos and the NDHSAA Ineligibility Rules

Postby baseball » Thu Dec 06, 2007 12:13 pm

Hinsa wrote:I'm right there with you, dtvman. The statements DO contradict each other.

And I don't think any administrator is going to suspend someone solely off the basis of a picture. There would be an investigation and a logical decision made based on the weight of the evidence. Questions like "Where were you that night?" and "Who can verify your whereabouts?" will support/refute the photo. And trained investigators will know when someone is lieing when questioned - they watch body language clues and they can tell instantly if someone is telling the truth.

As for altering pictures, how many people have the skills to REALLY superimpose someone into a picture without being able to tell the difference? There are things like shadows, lighting angles, color variations, etc. that give away that a picture has been altered when you really examine the picture.

And if 99.9% of pictures are legit, that means that only 0.1% are fake. 99.9% accuracy would stand up in most courtrooms when supported by other evidence.

A question - have you EVER, EVER, heard of someone being suspended solely based on a photo that has been altered? I think we are arguing about a situation that has never even occurred.


thats why this topic was started....a girl got suspended because the super. saw pictures. im not saying the pic was altered but she was suspended solely based on that photo...
Pay Heed, All Who Enter: Beware of "The Phog"
baseball
NDPreps Legend
 
Posts: 4641
Joined: Sat Mar 25, 2006 5:53 pm

Re: Internet Party Photos and the NDHSAA Ineligibility Rules

Postby Hinsa » Thu Dec 06, 2007 2:07 pm

Sorry Baseball, you're right. My bad.

I'd like to know if any investigation was done in that case or if it really was just the photo. Sometimes to those who are not intimately involved in a case it can appear that no investigation was done when there actually was one.
Twins and Vikings Forever!
User avatar
Hinsa
NDPreps Legend
 
Posts: 2028
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 4:53 am
Location: THE Red River Valley Conference

Re: Internet Party Photos and the NDHSAA Ineligibility Rules

Postby baseball » Thu Dec 06, 2007 2:19 pm

yea all he said was that she was suspended for it, didnt say anything about an investigation but im assuming there was one.
Pay Heed, All Who Enter: Beware of "The Phog"
baseball
NDPreps Legend
 
Posts: 4641
Joined: Sat Mar 25, 2006 5:53 pm

Re: Internet Party Photos and the NDHSAA Ineligibility Rules

Postby sportsmart » Thu Dec 06, 2007 4:04 pm

Bottom line is if you are underage it is illegal. Stay away from it unless you want to chance getting caught. I am sick of this argument. If you take the chance and get caught step up and take the punishment. You were stupid enough to put yourself on the situation now deal with it. I know plenty of us that don't go and party or go to a party so we are not in that situation. We take our word of not drinking or being associated with it seriously. I am sick of all the kids that party during season wish you would all get caught.
User avatar
sportsmart
NDPreps Starter
 
Posts: 109
Joined: Sun Mar 11, 2007 2:36 pm
Location: North Dakota USA

Re: Internet Party Photos and the NDHSAA Ineligibility Rules

Postby baseball » Thu Dec 06, 2007 5:11 pm

what i dont like is you guys who come on here saying stuff like " plain and simple dont do it"....does that mean you guys are all perfect. im not saying kids should go out and drink, i never did once in high school, but ill admit ive made mistakes. can you guys honestly tell me youve never bent the rules on anything? jaywalking, going 27 mph in a 25, not using a blinker, yielding insteading of stopping? those are all laws are you saying you havent done one thing wrong? wow i wish i was you guys.....
Pay Heed, All Who Enter: Beware of "The Phog"
baseball
NDPreps Legend
 
Posts: 4641
Joined: Sat Mar 25, 2006 5:53 pm

Re: Internet Party Photos and the NDHSAA Ineligibility Rules

Postby baller01 » Thu Dec 06, 2007 11:13 pm

I can see why you guys can say I contradicted myself but that isn't how I meant to say it. What I meant to say is that even though most the time pictures are ledgit, doesn't mean a suspension should be based soley on that.
Winning isn't everything--but wanting to win is. -Vince Lombardi
User avatar
baller01
NDPreps Hall of Fame
 
Posts: 1542
Joined: Sat Dec 16, 2006 12:28 pm

Re: Internet Party Photos and the NDHSAA Ineligibility Rules

Postby fbinnd » Fri Dec 07, 2007 8:50 am

If you weren't there, appeal the suspension with the school board and then interview the people at the party. They will say you weren't there, and the picture is fake. Then, the person that e-mailed the pics will do the time.

You are trying to justify. Quit making every possible excuse for kids making bad decisions. If you go to a party, you're risking 6 weeks. Plain and simple. If you don't go, you've got nothing to worry about.
fbinnd
 

Re: Internet Party Photos and the NDHSAA Ineligibility Rules

Postby sportsmart » Fri Dec 07, 2007 12:05 pm

baseball wrote:what i dont like is you guys who come on here saying stuff like " plain and simple dont do it"....does that mean you guys are all perfect. im not saying kids should go out and drink, i never did once in high school, but ill admit ive made mistakes. can you guys honestly tell me youve never bent the rules on anything? jaywalking, going 27 mph in a 25, not using a blinker, yielding insteading of stopping? those are all laws are you saying you havent done one thing wrong? wow i wish i was you guys.....



Not saying we are perfect. These are stupid comparisons. Everyone knows people sometimes drive faster and sometimes we don't use a blinker. Underage drinking doesn't even compare. Just compare underage drinking to jaywalking nice try though!
User avatar
sportsmart
NDPreps Starter
 
Posts: 109
Joined: Sun Mar 11, 2007 2:36 pm
Location: North Dakota USA

Re: Internet Party Photos and the NDHSAA Ineligibility Rules

Postby baseball » Fri Dec 07, 2007 12:41 pm

sportsmart wrote:
baseball wrote:what i dont like is you guys who come on here saying stuff like " plain and simple dont do it"....does that mean you guys are all perfect. im not saying kids should go out and drink, i never did once in high school, but ill admit ive made mistakes. can you guys honestly tell me youve never bent the rules on anything? jaywalking, going 27 mph in a 25, not using a blinker, yielding insteading of stopping? those are all laws are you saying you havent done one thing wrong? wow i wish i was you guys.....



Not saying we are perfect. These are stupid comparisons. Everyone knows people sometimes drive faster and sometimes we don't use a blinker. Underage drinking doesn't even compare. Just compare underage drinking to jaywalking nice try though!


They are all laws...why cant they be compared?? maybe i should use school related rules, cheating on a test, skipping class. plain and simple, dont cheat. go to class, simple as that.
Pay Heed, All Who Enter: Beware of "The Phog"
baseball
NDPreps Legend
 
Posts: 4641
Joined: Sat Mar 25, 2006 5:53 pm

Re: Internet Party Photos and the NDHSAA Ineligibility Rules

Postby sportsmart » Fri Dec 07, 2007 2:31 pm

baseball wrote:
sportsmart wrote:
baseball wrote:what i dont like is you guys who come on here saying stuff like " plain and simple dont do it"....does that mean you guys are all perfect. im not saying kids should go out and drink, i never did once in high school, but ill admit ive made mistakes. can you guys honestly tell me youve never bent the rules on anything? jaywalking, going 27 mph in a 25, not using a blinker, yielding insteading of stopping? those are all laws are you saying you havent done one thing wrong? wow i wish i was you guys.....



Not saying we are perfect. These are stupid comparisons. Everyone knows people sometimes drive faster and sometimes we don't use a blinker. Underage drinking doesn't even compare. Just compare underage drinking to jaywalking nice try though!


They are all laws...why cant they be compared?? maybe i should use school related rules, cheating on a test, skipping class. plain and simple, dont cheat. go to class, simple as that.


These are not rules that are against allowing you to compete in a sport!!! So they shouldn't be compared....THINK ABOUT IT!!! so you are saying we should start saying if students don't go to class, cheat, etc they should get 6 weeks also. Heck I have no problem with it. Maybe it would be helpful. Great idea.
There is no argument here so I am done. Don't drink if you want to compete. If you think being around alcohol is that important don't cry when it comes back and bites ya in the butt.
User avatar
sportsmart
NDPreps Starter
 
Posts: 109
Joined: Sun Mar 11, 2007 2:36 pm
Location: North Dakota USA

Re: Internet Party Photos and the NDHSAA Ineligibility Rules

Postby baseball » Fri Dec 07, 2007 6:00 pm

my point is that federal and state laws should not decide if a kid plays sports and what not. if a kid is gonna get suspended it should be for cheating, or skipping class and other school related activities. my point with the laws was that why is it that just the drinking and smoking law gets a kid suspended, when if he gets a speeding ticket he gets no penalty...
Pay Heed, All Who Enter: Beware of "The Phog"
baseball
NDPreps Legend
 
Posts: 4641
Joined: Sat Mar 25, 2006 5:53 pm

Re: Internet Party Photos and the NDHSAA Ineligibility Rules

Postby balla45 » Sun Dec 09, 2007 7:25 pm

I have wondered about this for awhile now so maybe one of you can tell me. Isn't everything illegal you do when you are a minor (under 18) considered confidentail information? If it is, is it not then illegal for the police to notify the school of any illegal activities you participate in, when the school is not directly involved?

I know, for example, of a person who got a MIC during the summer. The police then notified the school of this happening. Does that not violate some sort of confidentiality law?
~I have no patience for anyone who doubts me, none at all. My entire goal is to make them feel ashamed for writing me off.

Jordan Maurer
North Dakota Phenom - President
jordan.maurer@northdakotaphenom.com

~Be phenomenal or be forgotten.

~It does not take talent to hustle!
User avatar
balla45
NDPreps Legend
 
Posts: 4262
Joined: Tue Dec 26, 2006 5:46 pm
Location: Bismarck, North Dakota USA

Re: Internet Party Photos and the NDHSAA Ineligibility Rules

Postby baseball » Sun Dec 09, 2007 7:43 pm

balla45 wrote:I have wondered about this for awhile now so maybe one of you can tell me. Isn't everything illegal you do when you are a minor (under 18) considered confidentail information? If it is, is it not then illegal for the police to notify the school of any illegal activities you participate in, when the school is not directly involved?

I know, for example, of a person who got a MIC during the summer. The police then notified the school of this happening. Does that not violate some sort of confidentiality law?


kinda like if they get a parking ticket, their name cant be put in the paper. or am i understanding the statement wrong,..
Pay Heed, All Who Enter: Beware of "The Phog"
baseball
NDPreps Legend
 
Posts: 4641
Joined: Sat Mar 25, 2006 5:53 pm

Re: Internet Party Photos and the NDHSAA Ineligibility Rules

Postby balla45 » Sun Dec 09, 2007 8:08 pm

baseball wrote:
balla45 wrote:I have wondered about this for awhile now so maybe one of you can tell me. Isn't everything illegal you do when you are a minor (under 18) considered confidentail information? If it is, is it not then illegal for the police to notify the school of any illegal activities you participate in, when the school is not directly involved?

I know, for example, of a person who got a MIC during the summer. The police then notified the school of this happening. Does that not violate some sort of confidentiality law?


kinda like if they get a parking ticket, their name cant be put in the paper. or am i understanding the statement wrong,..


Yes, that is basically what I am saying.
~I have no patience for anyone who doubts me, none at all. My entire goal is to make them feel ashamed for writing me off.

Jordan Maurer
North Dakota Phenom - President
jordan.maurer@northdakotaphenom.com

~Be phenomenal or be forgotten.

~It does not take talent to hustle!
User avatar
balla45
NDPreps Legend
 
Posts: 4262
Joined: Tue Dec 26, 2006 5:46 pm
Location: Bismarck, North Dakota USA

Re: Internet Party Photos and the NDHSAA Ineligibility Rules

Postby ndfan » Sun Dec 09, 2007 8:15 pm

You guys don't think if that was illegal that cops aren't allowed to give this information that the kids Lawyers would know that and use that to there advantage? Just my thought.
Matt Houdek. @ndfan55
User avatar
ndfan
NDPreps Legend
 
Posts: 3046
Joined: Thu Jan 05, 2006 6:45 am
Location: Mayville

Re: Internet Party Photos and the NDHSAA Ineligibility Rules

Postby balla45 » Sun Dec 09, 2007 8:26 pm

ndfan wrote:You guys don't think if that was illegal that cops aren't allowed to give this information that the kids Lawyers would know that and use that to there advantage? Just my thought.


I don't think alot of kids have lawyers, and your answer was exactly the reason I asked the question. Is it legal or not, does anyone know for sure?
~I have no patience for anyone who doubts me, none at all. My entire goal is to make them feel ashamed for writing me off.

Jordan Maurer
North Dakota Phenom - President
jordan.maurer@northdakotaphenom.com

~Be phenomenal or be forgotten.

~It does not take talent to hustle!
User avatar
balla45
NDPreps Legend
 
Posts: 4262
Joined: Tue Dec 26, 2006 5:46 pm
Location: Bismarck, North Dakota USA

PreviousNext

Return to Hot Topics

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests