October 23rd, 2014 at 6:47 PM ^
Seriously hope you stay around. I like your posts.
October 23rd, 2014 at 9:10 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
October 23rd, 2014 at 6:48 PM ^
October 23rd, 2014 at 6:50 PM ^
October 23rd, 2014 at 7:43 PM ^
They aren't destroyed and are fully recoverable unless and until they are overwritten. Even on very busy servers they persist for months de minimis. Laptop, phone, print, litigation server, backup server et al. the data and tablular metadata can persist many years. Recipient's ISP and local device should contain significant metadata to permit reconstruction. I do this all the time in collaboration with trusted forensics people and my technical background mirrors Brian Cooke's technical background but with more real-world experience. If there was data on Brandon's devices and network since hiring inception, that data is almost certainly still recoverable.
October 23rd, 2014 at 7:56 PM ^
missed the IRS scandal.
October 23rd, 2014 at 8:33 PM ^
October 23rd, 2014 at 6:50 PM ^
ignore this
October 23rd, 2014 at 7:03 PM ^
October 23rd, 2014 at 7:05 PM ^
If you're going to post something that by its very controversial nature will make a large portion of the audience say, "Wait a minute - I call bullshit on this," then you have to have the proof - and you have to print it. WD may have been duped, and if so, that's on his source. But the minute he posted it, it was on him.
I don't know the kid, and while he may get overly-exuberant at times, he certainly doesn't annoy me like he does a lot of others. And I can appreciate anyone with a passion for all things UM. I hope he stays, and I hope he learns from this. And next time, verify - and be able to show it.
October 23rd, 2014 at 7:07 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
October 23rd, 2014 at 7:23 PM ^
October 23rd, 2014 at 7:58 PM ^
However, he first made reference to it during the off season. I think this past summer, during the summer of hate Brandon.
October 23rd, 2014 at 7:08 PM ^
this is how our business and political leaders act. Leave only the trail that needs to be left.
October 23rd, 2014 at 7:24 PM ^
October 23rd, 2014 at 7:27 PM ^
October 23rd, 2014 at 7:35 PM ^
October 23rd, 2014 at 7:35 PM ^
Who/what is WD? I've searched high and low through mgoblog and couldn't find it.
October 23rd, 2014 at 7:37 PM ^
October 23rd, 2014 at 7:56 PM ^
Ahhhhhhhh yes. Thank you.
October 23rd, 2014 at 11:26 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
October 23rd, 2014 at 7:48 PM ^
Ok, here's the thing. The fact that there are "no responsive records" doesn't mean this was faked. It also doesn't mean it was not faked.
I've been a reader of the blog and the message boards for a long time, but this is the first time I've posted and I'm doing so because I saw a lot of things that were inaccurate in this thread. A few other people have also made these same points, but really, they're worth reiterating.
- Someone mentioned above that "no responsive records" could be due to the fact that the email was deleted. This is true. The response didn't say "there are no responsive records and no responsive records ever existed." It would be illegal for DB or anyone else in the University to delete the email after receiving the FOIA request, but nothing would prevent him from deleting it prior to that. There are posters up all over the admin offices reminding people to delete email they don't need. Why do you think those posters exist? (Hint- they don't care about the space the email takes up)
- Furthermore, if the email is not an "official record," it is not responsive. This means if DB or the University decided that it was a personal email, they would state that no responsive records existed. While I can't remember exactly what the email WD posted said, it would probably be dubious to call that a personal email, but I'm saying it's possible.
- Most of UM uses email hosted by Google. This means we don't an exchange server (Exchange is a Microsoft thing). I'm not sure if we control our MX server but frankly I doubt it. This could mean that any email purporting to be from a UMich email account would look like it was sent from a gmail account. There's a chance that the AD has its own email servers and isn't managed by Gmail - I know UMHS operates like this (due to HIPAA I think?) and that may not be the only unit.
- It's not libel.
To reiterate, the FOIA response is not proof the email was false (even though it certainly could be false). The fact that WD can't produce the original email is far better evidence than the FOIA response.
October 23rd, 2014 at 8:05 PM ^
This was informative. Thanks - and welcome.
October 23rd, 2014 at 8:21 PM ^
Simply to delay the release of the records, and also charging 385 dollars to review less than a week's worth of email from two addresses.
— mgoblog (@mgoblog) October 23, 2014
October 23rd, 2014 at 10:35 PM ^
October 24th, 2014 at 9:32 AM ^
LOL coming from you, MGoSpartyConcernTroll.
October 23rd, 2014 at 9:03 PM ^
Your last sentence is really the big one (and why I've been skeptical about this all along) - how/why would he have only the reply to the email, and not the original?
October 23rd, 2014 at 9:07 PM ^
Made it worth it to read this thread to the end. Thanks.
October 23rd, 2014 at 7:55 PM ^
October 23rd, 2014 at 9:34 PM ^
I'm so dissapointed. I wasn't sure about it from the start, but this could have been the nail in DB's coffin.
DB is like Jason Voorhees, no matter how many bad things happen he just keeps coming back.
October 23rd, 2014 at 10:21 PM ^
October 23rd, 2014 at 9:36 PM ^
October 23rd, 2014 at 11:45 PM ^
I like WD but Mgoblog's supposed to be a community. There's really no reason for any member to start 5-10 threads a day. If this continues Brian might have to change the name of the blog to MGoWD&Alum96
October 23rd, 2014 at 11:54 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
October 23rd, 2014 at 11:52 PM ^
The kid needs to sit in the corner for a while. Like a 6 month ban or something.
October 24th, 2014 at 6:29 AM ^
October 23rd, 2014 at 11:53 PM ^
October 24th, 2014 at 10:09 AM ^
I'm not sure this means the email exchange didn't happen as the response seems open to interpretation but I think this whole thing is a good lesson for everyone on how easy it is to get up in the emotion of the moment and a great example of why the board's usual caution when it comes to unsubstantiated claims is warranted. At the time WD posted the email, the anti Dave Brandon sentiment was high and WD certainly felt or hoped the emails were legit. More than half of the people on this blog, including Brian, clearly thought they were real. Without the fevered pitch of 'DB must go' echoing in the background, LSA probably would not have been overruled when he took down the thread. As cooler heads prevailed, FOIA requests were filed and people started to really question the decision - which sets this blog apart from so many other forums for fans.
In any event, I'm not going to come down too hard on WD. He made an unwise decision posting the email without proof it was real but he was backed up by a majority of people on the board including the owner of the site. Hopefully he (and all of us) will remember this and be more judicious going forward.
(I sound a lot more like a Mom in this post than intended!)
October 24th, 2014 at 11:48 AM ^
Must be careful to avoid "vigilante journalism" especially when the pitchforks are out. WD has a few role models that use this practice at times. J U Bacon admitted tweeting and giving interviews where he stated certain items about Brandon and Hoke as fact and a few days later he admitted it was all speculation to stir things up. Brian has accused Brandon of trying to force doctors to modify their diagnosis of Morris in order to make Brandon look good. Brian admitted a few days later on the radio that he was speculating and had no evidence. He is progressing a FOIA request to investigate this. Perhaps, he should have made this more clear as many on this blog took his initial tweet as fact. Not sure I have seen either Brian or Bacon clarify these items in print to follow up what they admitted on the radio. But, heck, this is the Internet and anything goes. WD has posted pictures with Brandon, but I don't know whether they actually know each other. I'm an old guy and have many views that are different from the frequent posters. If I were WD, I would send an email to Brandon apologizing. Pending the FOIA findings, Brian might do the same if his accusations are baseless. Neg away. 1973/4 BS/MS ME.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
October 24th, 2014 at 10:57 AM ^
What provoked it, I cannot say. But I'm in possession of similar email where Hoke told someone to "have a nice life." Those are his words.
October 24th, 2014 at 12:26 PM ^
Wait, now it's Hoke who said this and not Brandon?
October 24th, 2014 at 1:34 PM ^
Whoops. It was Brandon. And for the record, the context is perfectly clear in the email.
October 24th, 2014 at 1:14 PM ^
Hey acs236!
Have a nice life. Seriously - not a bad one, but a nice one.
Your friend,
blueblueblue
Context matters.