George W. Maschke wrote on May 29
th, 2008 at 8:18pm:
Jim,
What I meant to point out to Princessmoe is that the matter she mentioned could be considered to fall within the scope of the question about "police involvement," though I can understand how a reasonable person could in good faith interpret the question differently.
Whether or not to disclose this incident is a judgment that Princessmoe will ultimately have to make for herself. But disclosing this incident does not necessarily increase her chances of passing the polygraph (assuming it's required). In fact, such a disclosure could well decrease her chances of passing because doing so will indicate to the LVMPD polygraph section that she has posted on this forum, and could result in an arbitrary accusation of attempted countermeasures.
Well George, not surprisingly I disagree. If I asked you (or anyone) have you ever had sexual contact with anyone other than your wife? Does that mean only when married, have you cheated? Or, does that mean, the way a normal person would interpret it as, anyone other than your wife, ever?
By somehow allowing for "interpretation"
you put aside the primary principle of polygraph success; not to lie, minimize, rationalize or withhold. I would suggest that is primary problem with many of your minions. They "interpreted" what they wanted and found themselves unable to get through a test and now condemn the process for catching them, althewhile, they didn't "lie." Perhaps not, but I suggest they in fact withheld, minimized, avoided, rationalized, etc.
You are correct in stating she/he will have to decide whether or not to disclose this information. You are also correct in stating that by revealing this information does not increase her/his chance of passing the exmaination. There may very well be other issues and I would never rest anyone passing a pre-employment examination on a single issue of contention presented here.
As for assumptions of an applicant coming on your site; that is assumed in today's age of information. No need to boost your ego on that one. As for arbitrary assumptions of CM's. Unless she/he decides to employ them, just because an applicant has been on this site, does not mean they're trying to beat the examiner and no "arbitrary" accusations should be made unless they do.
Sackett