PDA

View Full Version : Scarano



BrooklynRider
October 21st, 2005, 12:39 PM
Apparently Wired New York is viewed as a "news" source by other websites. It's a pretty vicious circle that I wouldn't have predicted. I thought these were discussion threads.

lofter1
October 21st, 2005, 01:01 PM
Who is this Scarano guy?

Any links? Further info?

ASchwarz
October 21st, 2005, 01:44 PM
Are you sure about this or are you posting a rumor? The Scarano website works just fine and they've heard nothing about this at the DOB. I just called a friend who works at Buildings. She heard nothing at all.

lofter1
October 21st, 2005, 02:07 PM
...some sort of New York City stamp that allowed him to self-certify buildings. Not that self certification can't be done...

Self certification in the hands of a dishonest person opens the doors to all sorts of unscrupulous activities.

I know of situations where architects / engineers have filed self-certification at DOB stating that work at a particular building was "not an asbestos project" when the exact opposite was true -- the presence of Asbestos Containing Material (ACM) was prevalent but the owner wanted to get around the cost of dealing with it. So then workers are hired and come in to remove hazardous materials (with no notice to them of the possible dangers they are facing by working with the ACM). Once the ACM is gone how can it be proven that a fraud was perpetrated? And that the self certification was a sham?

Self certification in the hands of an honest professional serves the purpose of streamlining what has been a lengthy and onerous procedure at DOB, but the example cited by BR is but one of many ways for self certification to be mis-used.

I'm all for busting / discrediting / barring any and all professionals who abuse the privilege of self certification.

NoyokA
October 21st, 2005, 02:11 PM
I made it clear that I heard it from a friend in the RE industry. There were details enough to make it interesting and plausible. There was a specific Wliiamsburg building mentioned to me and the specifics of what was done there were told to me. If this is wrong, I'm the first to say let's delete or lock this. I'm putting it out there to see if anyone has heard anything similar.

I'll stand by the moderators decision on this. I have no ax to grind with the guy, so we can kill this if need be. But, why would you think DOB would (1) tell you about an arrest and/or investigation that isn't in the news and (2) that DOB employees would be privvy to details of an arrest, which would be a DA and criminal issue? I think those are rhetorical. But, I heard it and I posted it.

Moderators?

Let's keep the thread open for now.

ryan
October 25th, 2005, 01:19 PM
ahh, back open so I can say that when I first saw this thread I was 100% convinced that the punchline was going to be "...for bad style," "...posing as an architect," or "...for crimes against urbanity"

Fabrizio
October 25th, 2005, 04:09 PM
"I am posting information I have heard as we do in all the other threads here to see if anyone has heard similar info."

I don´t buy that. I think this thread is morally wrong.

The thread is titled: "Scarano Arrested!" (Complete with exclamation point.)

It is very deliberately written.

It´s not titled: "Has anyone else heard this nasty rumour....?"

In you first paragraph you do use the word "allegedly" ... but you continue with, "info is still sketchy, but the arrest is real."

Got it? "....the arrest is real"

And you go on:

"There are people living in spaces that were sold to them under false certification that obviously paid excessive amounts for what amounted to "studios". Lawsuits should come pouring in."

This does not seem like someone interested in getting to the bottom of a nasty rumour they´ve heard.

You give your later posts a coy innocent spin, but the damage has been done. Your first post (and the "Scarano Arrested! header) is a text-book lesson in how to spread rumours and destroy.

Nice job Brooklyn!

BrooklynRider
October 25th, 2005, 04:31 PM
You're email is about me, not the topic. You have established a pattern at WNY of posting about me rather than the subject(s). I've asked the Moderators to rule on this thread prior to this post and prior to your last offensive post - the one that was deleted by moderators. Whether this thread should be deleted, let alone be locked, is up to Moderators.


FORUM RULES



Stay on topic
Read the thread heading and the first post, and if you are replying to the post, make sure it is relevant. If the heading is ďLibeskind Modification - picsĒ, then posting a petition to email Libeskind is not appropriate.



What Are Moderators?
Moderators oversee specific forums. They generally have the ability to edit and delete posts, move threads, and perform other manipulations. Becoming a moderator for a specific forum is usually rewarded to users who are particularly helpful and knowledgeable in the subject of the forum they are moderating.



If you encounter a post that you believe violates the rules, do not respond to it, and especially do not quote it. Report it to the moderators.

If you must respond, note that you have referred the post to the moderators. Hopefully, it will end discussion until the problem is resolved.

Fabrizio
October 25th, 2005, 05:05 PM
I notice that you´ve now doctored your original post.

If your concious is clear and the post, as you say, violates no forum rules why change it? In my post above I make no mention that the post should deleted. I do express my opinion about the post... as is often done here.

BrooklynRider
October 25th, 2005, 06:46 PM
Cheers Fabrizio - the thread is all yours!

Law & Order
October 25th, 2005, 07:52 PM
Ive noticed posts are missing.

ablarc
October 25th, 2005, 08:10 PM
Could they have led to a libel suit?

lofter1
October 25th, 2005, 08:57 PM
All this cross-referencing and still no news on the original allegation / rumor?

ZippyTheChimp
October 25th, 2005, 09:15 PM
I received a moderator alert on this thread, and since I had not posted here nor read the thread since 10/21, and that several posts have been altered or deleted, I was reluctant to get involved.

We strive to be accurate at Wired New York, and encourage posters to provide documentation for the information they provide.

From what I remember from the original post, it was immediately questioned as to the veracity of the information. A satisfactory explanation was given, and a moderator decided to keep the thread open.

At that point, anyone reading through the thread would not have been misled into thinking that the information was true. Further dissection of BrooklynRider's posts provide no additional information about the status of Mr Scarano, but merely attack the poster.

Yes, that exclamation point may be a problem, but I have a problem with the use of cuz. If you all were journalists, I could move to have your privileges revoked.

The one noteworthy remark in this thread was by Ryan:
"Crimes against urbanity."

I think even Scarano would laugh.

ryan
October 26th, 2005, 12:24 AM
re: lying on the internet can also get you arrested

It has come to my attention that some small and insignificant people are lying about me on the blog you are monitoring.

Brooklyn has been my home for my entire life and it can become a very small place when people are not being honest and verifying what they are saying.

I also believe that the work we are doing has helped the borough in its housing expansion.

please verify your stories before you sign on to them yourself.

scarano

Um, can making fun of idiots on the internets (http://www.curbed.com/archives/2005/10/25/dept_of_scurrilous_rumors_scarano_arrested.php) also get you arrested?

Fabrizio
October 26th, 2005, 04:48 AM
"From what I remember from the original post, it was immediately questioned as to the veracity of the information. A satisfactory explanation was given, and a moderator decided to keep the thread open.

At that point, anyone reading through the thread would not have been misled into thinking that the information was true. Further dissection of BrooklynRider's posts provide no additional information about the status of Mr Scarano, but merely attack the poster."

OK... fine Zippy. I`M the one who is wrong. It´s all about me attacking Brooklyn.

If this is so...why has the original post and his others been removed? If there was nothing wrong with them... if it wasn´t rumour mongering... if everyone´s hands are clean ....why not leave them?

ZippyTheChimp
October 26th, 2005, 08:49 AM
Pardon my for shouting, but I made the following statement on another thread, and it was cited here, but ignored.



Originally Posted by ZippyTheChimp
If you encounter a post that you believe violates the rules, do not respond to it, and especially do not quote it. Report it to the moderators.

If you must respond, note that you have referred the post to the moderators. Hopefully, it will end discussion until the problem is resolved.


You are free to challenge any information that is posted here, but that does not extend to challenging the motives or veracity of the poster. For that, you will follow the instructions above. If you report a post, an email in which you can describe your objections at length will be generated to all moderators.

You can also PM any moderator. BrooklynRider had sent me a lengthy PM explaining the reasons the posts were edited and/or deleted. I found it confusing but reasonable.

The above procedure avoids exactly what has happened in this thread, and others that lead to my quote above: This topic is no longer about the subject; it is now about a personal feud that I doubt many others have any interest in.

Some people here really need to lighten up.

Future posts not relating to the subject will be deleted.

lofter1
October 26th, 2005, 09:51 AM
One suggestion: Perhaps the title of the thread should be revised to read simply "Scarano" ...

ZippyTheChimp
October 26th, 2005, 09:57 AM
Noted

Fabrizio
October 26th, 2005, 10:18 AM
yeah, since sitting there for the last 5 days...it might be a good idea.

Edward
October 26th, 2005, 10:38 AM
yeah, since sitting there for the last 5 days...it might be a good idea.
Fabrizio, if you want to participate in the discussions on this forum, please pay close attention to my remarks and remarks of other moderators. Zippy in the post above said that posts not on topic will be deleted, and your last post is not on topic.

If you are unhappy with the way this forum is moderated, make a polite suggestion on how to improve it. I do not care much about your sarcasm.

ryan
October 26th, 2005, 03:29 PM
Don't you have to be a publication to qualify for libel? I'm hoping there's something we agreed to when we registered that holds us responsible for the content, otherwise Edward's going to have to read each post with quite the detailed eye.

Isn't a forum like this considered more of a public conversation, legally?

lofter1
October 26th, 2005, 10:45 PM
It seems that Curbed has removed all references to Scarano ...

ryan
October 26th, 2005, 11:33 PM
still there (http://www.curbed.com/archives/2005/10/25/dept_of_scurrilous_rumors_scarano_arrested.php)

lofter1
October 27th, 2005, 12:07 AM
thanks -- I searched Gutter instead of Curbed ...

BrooklynRider
October 28th, 2005, 10:01 AM
Attn: Brooklyn Rider

I am writing regarding the "Scarano Arrested" thread.
& am italicizing your quotes from the site & commenting on each:

"I made it clear that I heard it from a friend in the RE industry". Did you ever stop to think that the RE "friend" might have an issue with Scarano & wants to make him look bad? Or that he/she might be wrong? I know for a fact that Scarano was never arrested!

At first no, but as I'm the third person on these boards to be threatened by you, claiming to be Scarano, it wouldn't seem unreasonable. I did consider that the info might be wrong and those considerations were written about as well, but you conveniently paid no attention to them.

"I know for a fact that Scarano was never arrested" offers no more evidence than someone stating "Scarano was arrested." What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.


"There were details enough to make it interesting and plausible". You feel that false statements are interesting to the reader? Outrageous!

They have certainly become more interesting now that you have threatened me three times if I did not remove them.


"...a specific Wliiamsburg building...and the specifics of what was done there were told to me. If this is wrong, I'm the first to say let's delete or lock this. I'm putting it out there to see if anyone has heard anything similar". It is wrong & it should be deleted! I read ALL of the responses & did not see one
that would substantiate your claim.

I initially thought about what you wrote and deleted these posts. You have made claims as empty as those you claim I made. You are not in a position here to determine what gets deleted and what doesn't. I'll argue just as stenuously to you to prove I'm wrong.


"I have no ax to grind with the guy, so we can kill this if need be. ... But, I heard it and I posted it."
No ax to grind? Did you stop to think that this guy has a family and/or clients that may read this crap?.

I had no ax to grind and each successive post showed that. My willingness to go in and delete messages proved this. My later explanation proved this. NOW, after three threatening messages, I have an ax to grind.



Unless you can prove an arrest (& you clearly can not) then please remove ALL of this at once.

Thank you.

You had your deletions with this initial post. The continued harassment and threats make me realize you are just some bully trying to intimidate posters here. Piss off.

BrooklynRider
October 28th, 2005, 10:08 AM
I am not satisfied!
Take out every last lying posting you put up or on monday morning or i will have everone of my crack legal team seak out damages from you personally.
Lets make this easy

Scarano

If you're not satisfied, take it up with your wife.

I made the mistake of actually giving consideration to your previous private message and deleted my posts.

You spelled "everyone" and "seek" wrong.

I don't care whether you are satisfied or not. Bullies never are satisfied and don't know when to stop.

BrooklynRider
October 28th, 2005, 10:10 AM
I do not see the posting removed.

robert scarano

For your information, this is a discussion board. It is not a news site. "Corrections" and "retractions" are not required, but stories do evolve. I can't speak for everyone else, but there are times when someone gets it wrong. There were things I got wrong in this thread and in others. Credibility comes from having the integrity to admit mistakes when they are discovered.

This thread started with a bang and fizzled out when the information couldn't be substantiated in the press - where getting it right is required. This thread was as good as dead, but you couldn't stop bullying. At least I put my words, explanations, revisions and "mea culpa" out there.

You are operating as a thug through private messages.

You keep posting to me as robert scarano and this thread becomes more and more interesting to those readers you said wouldn't be interested.

(P.S. pronouns get capitalized).

lofter1
October 28th, 2005, 10:47 AM
I received the message below (which includes wording that could easily be construed as a threat) from arch59.

I pointed out in a reply to arch59 that my previous posts on this thread asked for clarification regarding the original post. I also asked for arch59 to point out where I had either lied or pandered (I've not yet heard back but will keep everyone posted).

I also reiterated that my comments regarding dishonest persons in the building industry stemmed from direct experiences involving the building where I live, DOB and various court actions.

Now I see that this poster (presenting himself as in PMs to BR as "Robert Scarano", in my case simply as "Scarano") seems intent on shutting down any discussion regarding improper building / construction (or should I say "construvtion"?) practices in NYC.




October 27th, 2005, 10:01 PM
arch59 (http://www.wirednewyork.com/forum/member.php?u=5478) http://www.wirednewyork.com/forum/images/statusicon/user_offline.gif
Junior Member
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 0


http://www.wirednewyork.com/forum/images/icons/icon1.gif scarano posting
Do you have any clue what so ever of what you are writing about? It appears to most rational people that you know very little if anything about construction in N.Y.C. and even less about it's filing procedures.

I will tell you that the world of construvtion in this city is a very small one when it wants to be and it doesn't take to kindly to lying and pandering individuals so be a little careful

Scarano

lofter1
October 28th, 2005, 11:05 AM
Some background regarding my interest in seeing that construction professionals in NYC perform at the required standard:

The article below describes what can happen when so-called "professionals" in the building industry do not comply with regulations. This same contractor had previously been hired by the owner of my building, during which work numerous instances of substandard work were documented and brought to the attention of various NYC agencies. Unfortunately complaints about this contractor were not heeded, and this inaction lead to tragic events.

http://newyork.construction.com/features/archive/0502_feature1.asp

(http://newyork.construction.com/features/archive/0502_feature1.asp)

Even with efforts to improve safety, nonunion, non-English speaking workers are still at risk from unscrupulous operators, Robert Roach, chief of staff for the New York City Department of Investigations, told the BTEA conference. "A lot of times we see contractors cutting corners in order to save time," Roach said.

Roach added that construction accidents are complicated to investigate, but his office is probing 10 criminally negligent homicide cases. Witnesses are often undocumented immigrants who leave the scene of an accident before officials can interview them. DOI is attempting to improve coordination with OSHA and with police, who often do not treat construction accidents as potential crime scenes, Roach said.

In a bid to sharpen deterrence and protect at-risk workers, some prosecutors want to make it easier to press criminal charges against contractors who put workers in unreasonable danger. "Often the facts of the case are insufficient under existing law to sustain a prosecution," or lead to merely a slap on the wrist, said Dan Castleman, chief of the Manhattan District Attorney's investigation division, a main speaker at the event.

As an example of the problems his office faces, Castleman cited indictments that followed a collapse at a townhouse renovation project on East 61st Street in May 2002 that killed one worker and injured three others. The D.A.'s office charged Shukun "Michael" Tam, his Manhattan company, Tamco Corp., and his foreman, Cheung Keat "Ken" Ai, with second-degree manslaughter, second and third-degree assault, and second-degree reckless endangerment.

While renovating the five-story townhouse, Tamco gutted the building, removed the original wooden beams, installed lightweight C-joists, and secured them into the load-bearing brick walls with mortar. After removing the roof, workers used 12-in. concrete cinderblocks to raise the exterior walls on the top floor.

But the C-joists, installed under Tam and Ai's supervision, buckled under the weight of the cinderblocks, causing the front of the building to collapse.

At trial, "it came out that the contractor ordered the blocks to be stored despite the unsecured deck," Castleman said, speaking in a follow-up interview. Prosecutors argued that Tam and Ai knew of the hazards and failed to take action despite warnings. Ai cooperated with prosecutors in a plea-bargaining deal, but the jury acquitted Tam of all but the reckless endangerment count.

"The standard of recklessness was too high a burden for us to meet" in order to obtain a manslaughter conviction, Castleman told the conference.

To create a stronger deterrent, the D.A.'s office wants to apply a "strict liability" standard to construction accidents. Prosecutors would have to prove only the misconduct, "not what was going on in that person's mind at the time of misconduct," Castleman said at the event. "If you violate safety regulations, resulting in death or injury, you should be held responsible."

ZippyTheChimp
October 28th, 2005, 11:56 AM
I am spending a lot of time on a thread that I have no interest in.

Arch59 is obviously not Robert Scarano, or he would have contacted the administrator directly.

Also, registering here with the sole purpose of confronting individual posters here, and bothering to put "boating" as an interest in his profile is a bit suspect.

So, I don't understand why anyone is wasting any time on this pest.

However, I don't think that this person is just a visiting troll. He might think that he remains anonymous by using PMs rather than post messages directly, but his IP address is

64.12.116.134.

I cannot cross-reference the IP to the member list (I hope Edward can), but if this person is a member of this forum, he is going to be banned.

And if I hear about any further PMs he sends to others, I will forward his IP to both his ISP and Robert Scarano.

Edward
October 28th, 2005, 12:27 PM
Let me outline my position on this issue.

Regarding the responsibility of forum owner for the content of posted messages. When a new user registers on this forum, they have to agree to the forum rules. The message shown on the registration page reads, in part, as

“Although the administrators and moderators of Wired New York Forum will attempt to keep all objectionable messages off this forum, it is impossible for us to review all messages. All messages express the views of the author, and neither the owners of Wired New York Forum, nor Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd. (developers of vBulletin) will be held responsible for the content of any message.
By agreeing to these rules, you warrant that you will not post any messages that are obscene, vulgar, sexually-orientated, hateful, threatening, or otherwise violative of any laws.”

It is impossible, and no attempt is made by me or forum’s moderation team to check and certify every message as a fact. When reliable information is available, every attempt will be made to insure that the information appearing on this forum is accurate.

Regarding what happened with Scarano firm. It was clearly stated from the beginning that the information about the arrest of Scarano and inappropriate actions of his firm is a rumor, which by definition is unsubstantiated information. As of this moment I do not have any reliable information that can clarify the situation. Hence the thread will stay open and if any reliable information will appear it will be promptly posted.

Regarding messages from a forum member Arch59. This member claims to be Robert Scarano, however his email address has aol.com domain and not scaranoarchitects.com domain. This means that it cannot be established as fact that arch59 is indeed Robert Scarano.

Regarding unwanted PM’s, you can either put such member on your ignore list, or ask such member do not contact you and I expect them to comply.

Fabrizio
October 28th, 2005, 04:39 PM
Curbed reports:

"UPDATE/REDACTION: Scarano Just Fine, Thank You
Earlier this week, we noted that there were rumors on the Internets (since redacted) that Dumbo architecture dean Robert Scarano had a run-in with the police. Scarano, in an email to Curbed, informs us that the rumor is emphatically false. Curbed regrets the error. "

I´ll bet they´ve been hoodwinked by this Scarano imposter too...

NoyokA
October 28th, 2005, 07:38 PM
This thread has spiraled out of control. I have given up trying to redirect the topic which is the rumor that Scarano was arrested. On face value there is nothing wrong with rumors; Brooklynrider said from the onset that it was a rumor. By definition it was not grounded, it neednít be either. This is a forum more along the lines of a blog than a new source and rumors can develop into stories, I donít want to discourage people from posting information in whatever stage or form. This is what I ask, that if you are posting something from the street, something that isnít in the news that you specify itís a rumor. The forum responds in an appropriate manner and all forum members refrain from personal attacks.