Married At First Sight - Season 2 - Sean Varricchio - Davina Kullar - *Sleuthing - Spoilers* #2

MenNeverChangeWomenDo wrote:An arrest record and a relationship with a miscarriage just a few months before the show. How was that possible?

Truth is stranger than fiction.........

Newbie here. From the start of the show Sean reminded me of someone and it finally hit me. I used to work with someone just like Sean. At first, he appeare to be a really great guy. Great stories, supposedly horrible ex-wife who was always so mean to him, perfect gentleman, a knowledgeable professional, etc. Then little by little I started seeing his true colors. Those great stories were actually closer to fish tales (I caught a fish the size of a shark that in reality was a tadpole kind of stories). One day I was sitting in a meeting with this guy and he starts to tell a story to the team about a contentious meeting he and I were at. The more he talked the more I looked like this: You see in his story I was in it, and none of what he said happened actually did. Maybe 10% of that story was true. Eventually one of his lies was so bad that he was fired for it, because it came down to stealing through omission so to speak. The worst part was that the guy was such a pathological liar that he actually believed his own lies to be true after a while. Even with undeniable proof to the contrary, he believed his own lies. So when I started watching MAFS this season, Sean was really coming off strange to me. Like someone who wasn't what he appeared to be. Until it finally hit me that he was reminding me of the guy I used to work with. And IMO, the story of the miscarriage may just be B.S. right along with that "promotion". I'd love to see the ex that miscarried come out and confirm it. Otherwise, I don't believe it. Just my

Welcome jtmyob21

Wow, I'm impressed with the amount of new posters here! Awesome.

MenNeverChangeWomenDo wrote:An arrest record and a relationship with a miscarriage just a few months before the show. How was that possible?

And let's not forget an alleged suspended license. How are all these things not a red flag or a big freaking deal?

I heard the Australian version doesn't require them to legally get married. Maybe they need to change it to that format to attract more male applicants. Call me crazy but if the things being said by NYCLax are true(which I believe them to be), then it almost seems like the only basis of the male participants was being good looking and nothing else. Cause these people weren't compatible on any level.

with all due respect, why would it matter about the miscarriage with his ex? the suspended license and dui i see as cause to not be on the show, but not that.

sunchick116 wrote:with all due respect, why would it matter about the miscarriage with his ex? the suspended license and dui i see as cause to not be on the show, but not that.

I think people are saying that with a miscarriage that was so fresh and new, he couldn't be emotionally invested in this process. There should have been a longer lapse between losing a baby with an ex to marriage to someone else a few short months after.

Hi Sunchick

I believe that when someone brings something up like this (pouting to Davina at a night out dinner that could have been romantic) indicates that they are not emotionally ready for marriage. This should have been vetted with the MAFS staff via their extensive questionnaire and interview process.

And now I would like to sell you a bridge, because MAFS failed in filtering out this contestant.

Btw, I love the premise of Married at First sight and believe that it will be a wave of the future. Independent contracts to pull folks that want to be married together. What I am upset about is that the process for mafs-2 was screwed up big time. Now the Married at first site premise gets a black eye.

The claim that 90% of all arranged marriages work is valid I believe...what rate is this show running at? We'll find out next week

-Gentleman (there are a few of us left)

Kashathediva wrote:

Amberish wrote:

Kashathediva wrote:Well, I am not saying this is an actual scenario, only speculative:
If I had a co-worker that was quite a character on a reality tv show and found this forum, I might show this site to lots of other co-workers. Then perhaps they showed this site to other co-workers. Before you know it you have a dozen or so new members posting. 
And then again, there are other scenarios, too. 

Possible. But that's not what my gut is telling me.

We know this for fact. :Nod:
There are other speculations, but not needed to go there.

Thing is, how realistic is it for a supposed coworker to become aware of another's supposed random employment drug testing results? IMO, if any of this is true, all it would take to bump things up is to contact the hospital (or Sean) and inform content and location of said post and which would require the hospital to take action to learn the identify of the poster in order establish where prosecute. But, also IMO, none of this is true, so that'll never happen, yet it's being allowed to be posted here.

Thus, and IMO, if it's true, it's illegal, because it's job related and even when talking about a public figure, and actionable, perhaps even to this site. On the flip if it's not, and IMO, then it's just gossip and lies, which is ok, to some extent except that it stinks the place up, because he's a public figure. Just saying, you know, IMO ...

Amberish wrote:

Kashathediva wrote:

Amberish wrote:

Possible. But that's not what my gut is telling me.

We know this for fact. :Nod:
There are other speculations, but not needed to go there.

Thing is, how realistic is it for a supposed coworker to become aware of another's supposed random employment drug testing results? IMO, if any of this is true, all it would take to bump things up is to contact the hospital (or Sean) and inform content and location of said post and which would require the hospital to take action to learn the identify of the poster in order establish where prosecute. But, also IMO, none of this is true, so that'll never happen, yet it's being allowed to be posted here.

Thus, and IMO, if it's true, it's illegal, because it's job related and even when talking about a public figure, and actionable, perhaps even to this site. On the flip if it's not, and IMO, then it's just gossip and lies, which is ok, to some extent except that it stinks the place up, because he's a public figure. Just saying, you know, IMO ...

IMO you are spot on...JMHO

Amberish wrote:

Kashathediva wrote:

Amberish wrote:

Possible. But that's not what my gut is telling me.

We know this for fact. :Nod:
There are other speculations, but not needed to go there.

Thing is, how realistic is it for a supposed coworker to become aware of another's supposed random employment drug testing results? IMO, if any of this is true, all it would take to bump things up is to contact the hospital (or Sean) and inform content and location of said post and which would require the hospital to take action to learn the identify of the poster in order establish where prosecute. But, also IMO, none of this is true, so that'll never happen, yet it's being allowed to be posted here.

Thus, and IMO, if it's true, it's illegal, because it's job related and even when talking about a public figure, and actionable, perhaps even to this site. On the flip if it's not, and IMO, then it's just gossip and lies, which is ok, to some extent except that it stinks the place up, because he's a public figure. Just saying, you know, IMO ...

 I have worked in healthcare for most of my adult life. Things that should be kept confidential often aren't. Go figure. 
Twice I have worked at a facility where there were drug testing issues and the person in question was common knowledge. So it happens a lot more than you think. It's laughable how often.
As far as things being "allowed" to be posted here:  if something violates site rules, it is dealt with appropriately, IMHO--I think the other mods and our Admin would agree.

I don't know if any of the scenarios painted are true or not. What I do know as links to this forum are posted at many sites and we get new members through various sources. We are able to track more things than the regular member is able to discern.

I'm not sure what the issue is. This whole forum has 767,000 posts which includes information given to share with us on various topics. Whether they are true or not, we have always taken the stance that everyone has the right to believe what they want to believe.

IMO it's not that much of a secret when an employee fails a random drug test. I think it's very realistic. I could see that happening, and I can see the rest of the employee's hearing about it. It happens all the time. If an employee decides to share it with us, that's their decision to do so. Are we suppose to start deleting all posts that aren't true? Am I suppose to ask for proof from every single poster, that's absurd to think so.

We never ask our members for their identity or proof. This isn't a court room. I don't need to verify that what everyone says on this forum is true with a certified true copy of the documents. It's their opinion and they can state it if they like.

If one chooses not to believe it, then simply respond why you don't think it's true in an acceptable manner according to the rules of this forum, or don't respond at all.

The information about Sean is linked to knowable facts in a workplace for sure

I think he wasn't promoted at all. I think he is having issues and was moved to staff development temporarily. And is heading for a leave of absence in any event. Opinion from me.

But it completely fits to me. Those nurse coworker posts were very credible to me even if motivate by an animus to out a cad as a cad anonymously online.