Originally Posted by
bungeebungee
@NYC17
You're attempts at grown up logic are so precious! Dial me up when you improve your reading. You appear to be fixated on the following language:
"If such tampering actually happens and were caught, the restaurant would be closed down and a case could be made for criminal charges."
Now, I realize that you may not be a native speaker (these are international fora and even an American might be naturalized), so let me explain. "If" is a word that creates a conditional statement. Correct, the whole point of the threat is "you don't know if we did, you probably can't prove, we did,, but maybe we did." My response -- flagged with the word "if" is that IF it happens AND were caught, the restaurant would be closed down and a case could be made for criminal charges. True or false? The restaurant was closed down. True or false? There were resulting criminal charges. See how easy that is? Now you can argue all you want that the restaurant later reopened or that criminal charges where only filed against the idiots who posted the video. /pat. That has no bearing on the point I made. There *were* criminal charges. At least one of the people ate a felony conviction. Do you have any idea what that means in a person's life? No? Look it up. The restaurant was closed by decision of the board of Health and later by public opinion. That's pretty clear.
So let's take this from the top. People in this thread -- go back -- I've spotlighted a couple, have said they (or heaven forbid, not them but maybe "that guy" would) would do things that might be in line with what happened in this case. Gosh, you want me to link you 20 others? No, I'm working through a fairly major firewall, how about you prove this is an isolated case. I made my preliminary prove up. Rebuttal is up to you and "nu uh, didn't" isn't much of a rebuttal.
I'm not seeing you produce proof of anything, so prove up or STUFU. Have a nice day.