Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 09:56, 17 June 2006

Probable Correction

It is highly doubtful that Jeff Skilling was interviewed by Harvard Business School and therefore, that he stated that he was "fucking smart". I was in Jeff's 1979 section, and to my knowledge nobody intereviewed for admission that year. At the time the School believed that interviews had the potential to create adverse impact on protected classes.

While I'm willing to give the benefit of the doubt, the "fucking smart" statement was in the documentary The Smartest Guys in the Room. You can dispute this, but try to find a source.Coleca 02:52, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

• Yeah, I caught that too (HBS had stopped admissions interviews several years before Skilling got there). My guess is that what happened is that he said that to an HBS admissions recruiter that came by SMU. HBS does that all the time, to try to get the number of applications up. They visited my school, and I spoke to them, but it had nothing to do with whether you got in or not.

Trivia

Well, I'm an idiot and reverted a reversion to blah blah blah. In any event, should intimations of consipiracy concerning the mutual fraternity of Lay and Skilling be mentioned? It is interesting, but I'm skeptical it's anything but a coincidence unless some evidence exists to the contrary. Coleca 04:38, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

• If true, since they are frat brothers, it could be more than coincidental. Further research is needed to confirm or refute it. Wahkeenah 05:01, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
• Why not just stick to the facts: they were both members of the Beta Theta Pi fraternity, and Lay DID recruit Skilling. Don’t get into speculation. The problem here is that the people taking down this comment are from the Beta Theta Pi page (obviously a members of the fraternity), and they do not want Beta Theta Pi mentioned on this page, so they keep deleting any mention of it. Over on the Beta Theta Pi page, they are policing the page nonstop, and both Lay and Skilling are listed as business leaders (for example, Skilling is listed as “former CEO of Enron”). Somebody put up “former CEO of Enron and convicted felon”, and it got taken down. They don’t want anything negative about their fraternity on Misplaced Pages (somebody said on the Beta Theta Pi discussion page that it was being used as a “cheerleading” page). That’s why it keeps getting taken down on this page. That’s the problem here – not whether it is a coincidence or not.

Please provide any evidence that the membership in the same fraternity had ANYTHING to with the recruitment. This isn't Skull and Bones. The "trivia" you are trying to include is not verifiable and it is meant to imply something that no one can say with certainty is true. They both drink coffee yet there is no mention that they are both coffee drinkers in the trivia section. They happened to belong to the same fraternity years apart and at different schools. That is merely coincidental. It is not germain to any of this. (And this has nothing to do with cheerleading. This is merely about sticking to VERIFIABLE FACTS that actually pertain to the issue and the fraternity membership has nothing to do with it). Rrude 15:18, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

• You seem a bit touchy about this oddity. Then again, so does the a-none. Wahkeenah 15:29, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

I have no problem with it being included if it can be proved that membership in the same fraternity had anything to do with the recruitment. But, if it can not be verified then it has no business being in here as it would have nothing to do with the situation. I have taken it to http://en.wikipedia.org/Talk:Kenneth_Lay (sorry, I'm not completely proficient with everything here at Misplaced Pages yet) and will glady discuss it here or there. Rrude 15:43, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

• I do not agree that it does not qualify as "trivia" that they are in the same fraternity. However, the mere mention of it implies a connection, as you indicate. So until there is further evidence, mentioning it in "trivia" would seem to require the qualification that "there is no known connection", in which case there is almost no point in mentioning it. Interesting coincidence is trivia. But I think whoever is posting it is trying to draw an inference where there is (so far) none verifiable. Of course, they might end up being "frat brothers" in a federal pen, but that's another story. >:) Wahkeenah 15:51, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

What you say makes sense. However, I would like to add that if they both happen to be fans of opera or the Chicago Cubs or both drove a Lexus does that really matter? It just really has nothing to do with the situation and is not necessary in an encyclopedia description. The problem is that (like you said) an inference is trying to be drawn here against the fraternity as if there is some sort of connection between the fraternity and corruption. That's just not the case. I am disgusted by Lay and Skilling and their actions. However, their actions had nothing to do with a coincidental membership in the same organization (despite what all the conspiracy theorists who love to harp on fraternal organizations) want to imply. Rrude 16:00, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

• I don't know that you can say their being in the same fraternity had nothing to do with one hiring the other. However, even if their fraternity relationship give him an "edge" in getting the job, it has nothing verifiably to do with the scandal. They could just as easily have stonewalled whether they were in the same frat or not. Wahkeenah 16:07, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
• I can't say (and no one else can either) that it did or did not have anything to do with the hiring. The implication though is that the fraternity membership DID have something to do with it and, in the real world, things just don't work like that (most of the time). People think that there is some big secret oath that fraternity men have to do anything and everything for a fraternity brother and that is simply not the case. These two did not commit crimes because they were in the same fraternity or because they were in a fraternity in the first place. Their crimes are because of their own actions and not because of a club membership 20 years (or so) prior. Rrude 16:18, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Claiming that Skilling belonged to a particular fraternity seems factual and verifiable. Why not just stick to this and let the reader draw (perhaps hasty) conclusions? Coleca 18:49, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

It is already noted under the personal life section of the article that he was a member of the fraternity while in college. Rrude 19:03, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

But it doesn't note there that he and Lay were both in Beta Theta Pi. Why are you trying to be so politically correct? We know you are from Beta Theta Pi, but what you are doing is shameful. Do you guys really have to stoop to this??? How old are you?

Arturo Ritti, please stop vandalizing the pages in your crusade for revenge against Skilling and Lay. You are not posting verifiable facts. Can you verify that he was hired because he was in the same fraternity? No? Then it is not varifiable and is giving misleading information dcesigned to impugn a reputation. What Skilling and Lay did was shameful but if had nothing to do with them being members of the same fraternity years apart and at different schools. It just doesn't work like that. Rrude 23:34, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

Some Googling on the subject shows no evidence (other than sites mirroring wikipedia) that make any connection between the Beta Theta Pi fraternity and Skilling's hiring. Misplaced Pages itself indicates he had been with a consulting firm for awhile, which happened to work with Enron, so when Skilling was hired, it may well have been just an unhappy coincidence. In fact, Lay abruptly left Enron and put Skilling in charge, ultimately ensuring that Skilling would take the fall with him. Is that any way for one "frat brother" to treat another? I think not. So I am pretty well convinced that their membership in the same fraternity is nothing more than "trivia"... but because its presence carries an implication with no foundation, it should only be listed with the word coincidentally in front of it. Then, if that other user takes the qualifier away, his point-of-view pushing will reveal itself. If he leaves it alone, fine. Wahkeenah 23:59, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

All you need to do to see his point-of-view pushing is go look at the edits he has done under User:80.41.127.153, User:80.41.113.114, User:208.251.56.210, User:80.41.116.72, User:80.41.76.139, User:80.41.37.156 and others that myself and others have found him using and have included various anti-semetic remarks and editing only on Lay & Skilling related pages. Rrude 00:29, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

I can't tell if they are really the same guy or not, but I haven't researched it as thoroughly as you have. In any case, I added your further qualification on the Skilling page to the revised entry on the Lay page. However, I'm not sure that specific argument holds water. Being members of a national fraternity could theoretically give someone an edge with another member of the same fraternity. However, as I said before, I don't see anyone besides this site and its mimics making anything of this. If there were something to it and/or if it mattered, some actual news source would have picked up on it by now. And, realistically, why does it matter why Lay hired Skilling? Unless that writer is not trying to besmirch those two as such, but the fraternity itself. That might be the case, in fact. However, there might also be a point to his charge that you are trying to "protect" the fraternity. However, anybody who bothers to watch the news knows who Skilling and Lay are, and pointing out on the frat page that they are convicted felons might be overkill. However, that might be enough "howevers" for now. It is worth pointing out that cutting that trivia back again to merely "Lay recruited Skilling" would be repetitive from the rest of both articles, and thus would not need to be mentioned again standalone. Anyway, let's wait and see what happens next, if anything. Wahkeenah 01:06, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

• I have reluctantly taken the view that we are going to have to include some form of Beta Theta Pi's editorializing. It looks stupid, but, hey, what can we expect from a "public" encyclopedia. Anti-semitic remarks???? You've gotta be kidding. So noting that Robert Rubin is jewish is anti-semitic??? That's pretty rich. And, no, my name is not "Arturo Ritti". I can't believe you bought that screen name as being my own. It's a takeoff from the word "arthritis". Duh. You guys are funny, though. I'll give you that. But you can keep on calling me "Arturo Ritti" if you want to. Hee, hee, hee, hee.
• Message to Wahkeenah - You wrote, "In fact, Lay abruptly left Enron and put Skilling in charge, ultimately ensuring that Skilling would take the fall with him." Are you sure about this? My understanding is that it was the other way around. My understanding is that Lay was taking a less active role when he the ceded the CEO spot to Lay - that Lay, being older, was doing what most CEOs his age do, i.e. remains just as chairman, perhaps still keeps an office at the company, retains use of the company jet, etc. And then I thought it was SKILLING who landed LAY into the mess when Skilling abruptly quit, and Lay ended up having to come back and take day-to-day control, which literally resulted in Lay's crimes - to wit: Lay's crimes almost entirely (totally?) occurred AFTER he came back and took over the reins again as CEO - that's when he made all the false statements to employees and investors. Point being, if Lay had "stayed above the fray" and had never made any public statements (it would have been better if he had even retired six months before the bankruptcy), then he might have walked away from the whole thing unscathed. Skilling, however, abruptly quit claiming he wanted to "spend more time with his family", which everybody knew was a joke because he had just gotten through divorcing his wife and was single at the time. Skilling got convicted on PRIOR knowledge of the fraud. There was no evidence that Lay had prior knowledge of the fraud. Thus, I thought it was a common conclusion that Skilling basically stabbed Lay in the back (nice going, fellow Beta Theta Pi fraternity brother), i.e. left him with the mess. But you write the opposite, that Lay ensured that Skilling took the fall. I don't understand this. And that LAY abruptly left Enron (not true). The above is also why I don't understand why Lay stuck with Skilling in the trial - if I was Lay, I would have blamed Skilling and would taken a plea bargain and cooperated against Skilling. But, no, Lay stuck with Skilling (because he was a fellow Beta???) and, as a result, will probably spend the rest of his life in prison/die in prison. If I was Lay, I'd be livid over what happened, i.e. spend the rest of your life in prison because of a few public statements you made during a 4-month period - all because your fellow fraternity brother quit on you in the middle of the night and left you with the mess (which, we now know, Skilling had prior knowledge of). Anyway, it was surprizing to read your statement that Lay "ensured" that Skilling would "take the fall with him". You're the first person I know of that has that viewpoint.
  • I'm just going by what the article said. I'm not an expert on the nuts-and-bolts of the Enron scandal like you are. Wahkeenah 07:09, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Which article said THAT???
• That one a-none finally played his real hand, his true agenda, by adding a bunch of sarcasm to the statement of it being coincidental. It is now clear that the only reason the a-none posted that is to deride the fraternity. Therefore, it has no business being in the "trivia" section. Wahkeenah 03:37, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
• Wahkeenah has finally agreed that there should be no editorializing in this section, just a statement of the facts. This point is now agreed.
• I agree that you betrayed your true intention, which is to somehow link the Enron scandal with that fraternity. Since there is no other reason to post that "trivia", it's irrelevant to the article. Wahkeenah 07:03, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
• Don't assign your own ideas of "intentions" to somebody else. In any event, intentions are moot (look that words up on Wiktionary). You have given no reason why the facts should not be stated. Just stick to facts, and leave out your motives, and anybody else's. This is not what Misplaced Pages is about. You are vandalizing it.
• You have been cited for vandalizing various articles, so your actions speak for themselves. Wahkeenah 07:20, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
• Explain why you think it's relevant. Wahkeenah 07:30, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
• Well, by your reasoning, virtually all "Trivia" should be removed from Misplaced Pages articles. But, nonetheless, it does seem a great coincidence that (1) these two guys were members of the same fraternity, (2) one recruited the other, (3) they both ended up at the top of this corrupt company, in the #1 and #2 spots, (4) they were some of the very few who took it to trial, and (5) they stuck together in their defenses, even when it would seem that Lay should have plea-bargained and flipped against Skilling, but instead he has taken it on the chin and court observers think it is likely that he will die in prison as a result of sticking with Skilling. Why did this guy do this??? Also, the culture of an organisation is set by the guys at the top, and these two guys were at the top, and they were from the same fraternity, and they set a culture of corruption, self-dealing and insider trading - that's why there are so many convictions, i.e. it wasn't just one rotten apple - the whole place was laced with corruption. But, nonetheless, maybe we better not mention the coincidence on Skilling's page. Perhaps it would be also be best to delete Skilling's and Lay's name from the Beta Theta Pi page - after all, it could interfere with recruiting. This is why Misplaced Pages will never be a responsible source - because negative items always get deleted from Misplaced Pages pages. You generally only get the positive when reading a Misplaced Pages page. It's inevitable, simply because - for example - the Beta Theta Pi page is policed almost exclusively by members of that fraternity. Do you think you would ever read anything negative on that page? No way. That's why Misplaced Pages is being criticized in news articles these days - because if an article deals with a PERSON or an ORGANISATION, then the article is going to be biased - because it is policed by either that person's family/friends, or that organisation's members. Think about it - you can't even mention on the Jeff Skilling page that he was recruited by somebody in the same fraternity he was in. The whole thing is laughable. It makes Misplaced Pages a laughable source.
• You're getting in the neighborhood of explaining what your complaint is, but you're not there yet. You're trying to somehow infer that this fraternity somehow bears some responsibility for Enron. Even if it's true that the one one hired the other due to frat connections (which you have not demonstrated), what does it have to do with anything? People get hired all the time due to "connections". So what? Wahkeenah 09:03, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
• (1) I am not trying to infer that this fraternity somehow bears some responsibility for Enron. YOU are drawing that conclusion. Take responsibility for drawing an improper conclusion. (2) And I never said that Lay hired Skilling because of a frat connection. YOU are saying that. I doubt if it would ever been that clear-cut. I would guess that it was a combination of a whole host of reasons, i.e. Skilling's work at McKinsey, Skilling's supposed knowledge of the gas industry, Skilling's ability to get along with Lay, and who knows, perhaps his frat connection was like icing on the cake. But I'm not saying that. We don't know. But at least point out the coincidence - or you don't want the public to know that, for some reason. And please stop vandalizing the page. You have reset the sentencing date back to September. It's not September any longer, it's October. Think before you vandalize.
• What is your purpose in pointing out this coincidence? Wahkeenah 09:25, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
• It is a "Trivia" coincidence. If Lay actually hired Skilling specifically because Skilling was also in Beta Theta Pi, then I would say it shouldn't be put under "Trivia", but should be part of a discussion of Lay's management style. We don't know if there is any significance to this coincidence - that is for a member of the public or a reporter/author to further investigate. But something is wrong if bare facts can't be reported in Misplaced Pages. Just stick to bare facts and leave personal opinion out of it. The bare facts are that they ARE both members of that fraternity, and Lay DID recruit Skilling to Enron. Just leave it at that, no personal opinion in it, none of that garbage that they want to put up (e.g., "this is purely a coincidence", etc, etc - we actually don't know if it is just a coincidence or not)
• Give me a reason why you do not want this coincidence reported at all in Misplaced Pages.
• Your earlier comments betray that it is not"bare fact" to you, it's significant. But you have no proof, just personal prejudice. And it is not true that it's "not reported". Those two guys are listed right on the frat page, or at least they were. Wahkeenah 09:45, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
• The fact that it is in "Trivia" means that it is insignificant, so don't put words in my mouth. Proof? Of WHAT???? I advocate just stating facts, and nothing else. As for it being listed on the frat page - a lot of people aren't going to go to every link on the Skilling page and then read all the other pages. But, actually, what you say supports my point - if it's listed there, there's no reason why it can't be listed here. Thanks for that.
• It's already in the article, and it's covered in the fraternity page. Listing it separately is purposeful overkill on your part. Wahkeenah 09:56, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Family Details

I'm not sure this line is necessary, appropriate, or sourced: "His youngest son attends Episcopal High School in Houston, Texas where he is said to be a bully and is often in disciplinary trouble." So, I removed it. Uncited character statements are not a good idea.Coleca 05:52, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

Needs attention

This article has some temporal discrepancies and needs updating. I'm not qualified to make the changes as I don't know the background. --Rhombus 18:27, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

intro checked. personal life checked and expanded. career at enron written. (all as of 4-07-06). i'm not going to check the rest of the article. (anon )

everything else looks ok and reasonable. it would be more helpful to state the "temporal discrepancies" so that others can check them. (anon_ )

Took out this paragraph, cause I couldn't find a citation for it anywhere. If you find a cite, please add it back in.

"Skilling had a breakdown on the streets of New York City in April 2004. After an evening of excessive drinking he began to harass people on the street and began to accuse total strangers of being part of the FBI. Police responding to the 911 calls found him uncooperative and concluded that he was an "emotionally disturbed person" in need of emergency assistance." Thanks. Jahenderson 18:19, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

put back in (cited) by (anon )

Cited

This article has been mentioned by a media organization: Amit Patel (January 20, 2005). "Corporations & securities brief—Enron trial of Skilling, Lay to stay in Houston". JURIST.

Disputed

I'm not sure about the "fair use"ness of the frontline quotes. Also, they may be inciting PoV in here now. Do they exist online anywhere (Like a PBS site?) that we can link to instead? Thanx 68.39.174.238 22:37, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

The supposed talk with Jack Grubman on the conference call where Skilling called someone an "asshole" is not correct, I'm pretty sure. I am almost positive he actually called a hedge fund manager who was shorting the stock an "asshole" on the call. This is in the book The Smartest Guys in the Room, about the Enron scandal. The fund manager was the head of Highfields Capital Management, I believe. I don't have the book with me (though I read it recently) so I cannot give you a specific page number, but it's in there, if someone has the time to look.

The hedge fund manager's name was Richard Grubman. The confusion with Jack Grubman, who also became notorious around the same time, is understandable but they're two different assholes, so to speak. I just looked it up in Brian Cruver's book, Anatomy of Greed, at p. 53-54. --Christofurio 15:50, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Vandal from 80.41.*.*

Note that the author who anonymously edits from IPs beginning with 80.41.*.* is a serial vandalizer and is utterly non-credible. More info. I have reverted his edits. Nova SS 04:26, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

• Misplaced Pages pages referenced by the press