After Wells Fargo CEO John Stumpf recited a drawn-out No True Scottsman Fallacy disguised as a hollow apology at the Senate Banking Committee's Wells Fargo hearing, senator Elizabeth Warren tore into him.
Warren slammed Stumpf for failing to fire any senior executives linked to the scandal, while Wells Fargo's aggressive sales tactics helped pump up the bank's stock price.
She said Stump's personal holdings of Wells Fargo stock increased by more than $200 million while the fake accounts "scam" was going on, thanks in part to the bank's success in selling tons of products to customers that they didn't need.
"You squeezed your employees to the breaking point so they would cheat customers and you could drive up the value of your stock and put hundreds of millions of dollars in your own pocket," Warren said.
Stumpf barely blinked, no doubt thinking that whatever Warren was saying, it was worth $200 million. Read the rest
A wag on the internet pointed out similarities between an enthusiastic review of a Herman Miller chair at BenchmarkReviews.com and a press release issued by the company selling it.
I notice that the article has in the last 24 hours been amended to identify some sections as being written by Herman Miller, which were previously not identified as such. Interestingly, you appear to be claiming that the current version is the original, something which is easily disproven via Google Cache.
Are these the only sections of the article not written by you personally? Can you confirm, for example, that the following passage is your own work?
"Designed by Bill Stumpf (who pioneered the Aeron Chair) and Jeff Weber, the Herman Miller Embody chair goes a step beyond being merely "heath-neutral". Over time, it can actually improve the health of the person sitting in it. Scientific studies have shown that Embody users can experience better circulation, reduced resting heart rates, and less tissue damage around the sitting muscles. Embody promotes natural alignment in the spine, relieving stress across the entire back no matter how you twist and turn."
If so, can you provide links to these "scientific studies", since presumably you wouldn't have cited them if you didn't read them yourself?
The review's publisher apparently used a DMCA takedown notice of copyright infringement to get the critical blog post deleted. I wonder if it will work out for them.
[via Mark Johnson] Read the rest