The revelations re: Max may have been brought into public view thru illegal means. Whether I personally have a problem with his actions is irrelevant. But now here's the problem -- the information is out there and the leaders of certain types of organizations need to have a dignity and gravitas about him. Particularly when they are the head of an international organization (operating in many different types of cultures that are far more conservative than Western Europe) that derives much of its power/stature through "moral authority". Such as the Int'l Olympic Committee or Red Cross. FIA is such an organization. In most cultures around the globe, Max's videotaped antics (legal or not, depending on locale) is considered "pretty out there". Heck, the heads of most types of large corporations in pretty much any country would be pushed out by their boards for something like this -- maybe not at Hustler, but many especially for those that operate globally. Because now that the information is out there, the head is an embarrassment to the organization and sullies the general reputation of the organization in the eyes of a LOT of important constituents. He is the butt of endless jokes and his name is irreparably associated with THAT video. It may or may not be brutally unfair to Max -- but that is not relevant to whether he can continue being the head and face of FIA.

RandomName - 14 May 2008 04:16 PM

The revelations re: Max may have been brought into public view thru illegal means. Whether I personally have a problem with his actions is irrelevant. But now here's the problem -- the information is out there and the leaders of certain types of organizations need to have a dignity and gravitas about him. Particularly when they are the head of an international organization (operating in many different types of cultures that are far more conservative than Western Europe) that derives much of its power/stature through "moral authority". Such as the Int'l Olympic Committee or Red Cross. FIA is such an organization. In most cultures around the globe, Max's videotaped antics (legal or not, depending on locale) is considered "pretty out there". Heck, the heads of most types of large corporations in pretty much any country would be pushed out by their boards for something like this -- maybe not at Hustler, but many especially for those that operate globally. Because now that the information is out there, the head is an embarrassment to the organization and sullies the general reputation of the organization in the eyes of a LOT of important constituents. He is the butt of endless jokes and his name is irreparably associated with THAT video. It may or may not be brutally unfair to Max -- but that is not relevant to whether he can continue being the head and face of FIA.

the same could be said for clinton when he got caught and guess what he stayed not only that how much is he making a year with speaking engagements.

wer56 - 14 May 2008 04:36 PM

RandomName - 14 May 2008 04:16 PM

The revelations re: Max may have been brought into public view thru illegal means. Whether I personally have a problem with his actions is irrelevant. But now here's the problem -- the information is out there and the leaders of certain types of organizations need to have a dignity and gravitas about him. Particularly when they are the head of an international organization (operating in many different types of cultures that are far more conservative than Western Europe) that derives much of its power/stature through "moral authority". Such as the Int'l Olympic Committee or Red Cross. FIA is such an organization. In most cultures around the globe, Max's videotaped antics (legal or not, depending on locale) is considered "pretty out there". Heck, the heads of most types of large corporations in pretty much any country would be pushed out by their boards for something like this -- maybe not at Hustler, but many especially for those that operate globally. Because now that the information is out there, the head is an embarrassment to the organization and sullies the general reputation of the organization in the eyes of a LOT of important constituents. He is the butt of endless jokes and his name is irreparably associated with THAT video. It may or may not be brutally unfair to Max -- but that is not relevant to whether he can continue being the head and face of FIA.

the same could be said for clinton when he got caught and guess what he stayed not only that how much is he making a year with speaking engagements.

Mmm, I see the whole political realm as it's own particular and distinct animal, so I don't view this one as a strong analogy, personally. I'm refraining from commenting on the Clinton thing so as to avoid a rathole tangent

RandomName - 14 May 2008 07:53 PM

wer56 - 14 May 2008 04:36 PM

RandomName - 14 May 2008 04:16 PM

The revelations re: Max may have been brought into public view thru illegal means. Whether I personally have a problem with his actions is irrelevant. But now here's the problem -- the information is out there and the leaders of certain types of organizations need to have a dignity and gravitas about him. Particularly when they are the head of an international organization (operating in many different types of cultures that are far more conservative than Western Europe) that derives much of its power/stature through "moral authority". Such as the Int'l Olympic Committee or Red Cross. FIA is such an organization. In most cultures around the globe, Max's videotaped antics (legal or not, depending on locale) is considered "pretty out there". Heck, the heads of most types of large corporations in pretty much any country would be pushed out by their boards for something like this -- maybe not at Hustler, but many especially for those that operate globally. Because now that the information is out there, the head is an embarrassment to the organization and sullies the general reputation of the organization in the eyes of a LOT of important constituents. He is the butt of endless jokes and his name is irreparably associated with THAT video. It may or may not be brutally unfair to Max -- but that is not relevant to whether he can continue being the head and face of FIA.

.

the same could be said for clinton when he got caught and guess what he stayed not only that how much is he making a year with speaking engagements.

Mmm, I see the whole political realm as it's own particular and distinct animal, so I don't view this one as a strong analogy, personally. I'm refraining from commenting on the Clinton thing so as to avoid a rathole tangent

hey i will agree with you on not getting into the clinton thing.

imo everthing is not white or black, what max did was behind closed doors and he wasnt publicly flaunting his stuff.
and for those who critizise him lets see what their private lives are like.

Gurney - 13 May 2008 11:34 AM

How hard would it be to implant a GPS device in Mad Max? The teams are clever and technology-savvy; they should be able to some up with some way of pinpointing his location at all times. Maybe they could hire a hooker to give him an enema (he'd like that, I bet) who could tag him.

They could fit one into a hat that says "I spank in French too", but it should be in French so he can't read it.

Gurney - 13 May 2008 04:11 PM

Psyd - 13 May 2008 03:54 PM

. . . Anyone that let's them [the press] get away with it shares liability.

Um . . . no.

Oh, hey, I hadn't quite thouhgt of that... No, wait, 'Is too!'
I do'nt mind that you don' agree with me, but at least give me the respect of an argument, preferably laced with fact or precedent, or at least a phlisophical point, but "Nuh-uh!"?! C'mon, you have better than that...

RandomName - 14 May 2008 04:16 PM

In most cultures around the globe, Max's videotaped antics (legal or not, depending on locale) is considered "pretty out there".

Actually, in quite a few cultures of the globe, they're punishable by death. Whose culture are we going to crucify him by? His? Yours? The sheer narcissism that doesn't allow another human of another culture his own private life is what is unfair. To correct that unfairness, you should ignore his personal life and get on with yours. If everyone in F1 or associated with F1 were as enlightened as all that, this would be a simple no-brainer. Last week's fish-wrapper. The very fact that some of the sponsors are upset is an indication of your collusion in this case. They worry that your indignation will affect their sales, therefor they call for his retirement. If you didn't care, they wouldn't care.
(Hey Gurn, this is what I was referencing.)
In this manner, your feelings one way or another DO affect the outcome. Leave him alone, and let him get on with it.
Look at it this way. This wasn't his first time at this, and I'll bet that he's been doing things like this for a while, You were fine when you didn't know, and he did his job just fine. Well, that's also arguable, but I'm guessing that his inability to satisfy all the players in F1 wasn't due to his extra-curricular activities. Just act as if it never happened, and it's just like before. It's *your* reaction that has changed...
And as far as the paternal connection to the National Socialist Movement of 1830's Germany goes, who else had a grandfather that had connections there? Oh yeah, our Pres! Someone tell me that that makes any difference. I dare ya! ; >

^ so then we impose the mores of Western Europe on the rest of the globe and tell them that their sensitivities don't matter. Okay, sounds good to me. See, our views on the matter are "enlightened" while those who disagree are not.

And as I said in my post, it's not whether I care or not. But evidently quite a few of the member clubs care. The ruler of at least one host country cares.

It isn't peoples' reaction that changed -- the available data changed. Like a lot of peoples' reactions to Mel Gibson, once the available data on his dark side became public.

So if ol Maxy shows up in drag will the spotters be able to spot him?

Anyone? Anyone?



Buehler? Buehler?

RandomName - 15 May 2008 08:32 PM

^ so then we impose the mores of Western Europe on the rest of the globe and tell them that their sensitivities don't matter. Okay, sounds good to me. See, our views on the matter are "enlightened" while those who disagree are not.

Lessee, you're not OK with that, but your OK with anyone else doing it? Hmmm... Two edges to that sword, or two faces to that coin?
No, we don't impose our mores on them, and we don't support them forcing us to adopt theirs, either. We live and let live, turn the other cheek, do unto others, whatever version of whatever religion's golden rule that you care to subscribe to (they all have one, you know...).

RandomName - 15 May 2008 08:32 PM

It isn't peoples' reaction that changed -- the available data changed. Like a lot of peoples' reactions to Mel Gibson, once the available data on his dark side became public.

Hmmm... Not mine. Mel's an actor, given to not being too danged smart on a good day. Most of the ones that I've been next to tend to adjust their actions and personality a bit to what they think is expected of them. He's a successful actor, but still just an actor. Everyone has their flaws, even you and I. Wouldn't it be a more pleasant place if we weren't made a pariah every time we screwed up.
Especially since Max didn't screw up, but is a victim in this...

NoTreadLeft - 15 May 2008 09:48 PM

So if ol Maxy shows up in drag will the spotters be able to spot him?

Anyone? Anyone?



Buehler? Buehler?

If Max shows up in drag all of F1 will need therapy.