Thread about racist NBA team owners

[Ben Kenobi]

No entity should be considered non-profit if the employees make more than the median US income.

Even if they only have a few? Makes no sense to me.

[Ben Kenobi]

The 2.5 mil i have no problem with but i think the lifetime ban is a bit excessive.

They didn't ban Ron Artest. I see no reason why they'd do this now.

[Ben Kenobi]

Anyone can be fired at anytime for any reason

Sava's supporting right to work now?

[Sava]

should I bother?

[Sava]

Lifetime ban and $2.5 mil fine:

http://espn.go.com/los-angeles/nba/s...s-life-ban-nba

Good. **** this guy.

[-Jrabbit]

Just heard the press conference. Commissioner Adam Silver invoked the nuclear option. Three-quarters vote required to force him to sell, and it's a lead-pipe cinch that they have the votes. It's important to remember here that this is essentially a club, with rules, and the participants own franchises, not teams. You can be kicked out of a club if you piss off the other members, within the association's constitution and bylaws. You can disagree with the actions being taken but that, in essence, is what's happening here.

[Sava]

BUT BUT MURICA

[rah]

Still think a life time ban is excessive. The market pressure would have driven him out.
And I bet if we had private conversations from almost any owner, it could be embarrassing.

But my opinion has no impact on my other opinion that the guy is still a douche.

[MrFun]

Don't think I'm not in favor of allowing people to hire and fire for whatever reason, obviously that should be legal, I just think it's also wrong force people out because of their political views, legal or not--what I was referencing in the Mozilla case. In that case, Brendan Eich's opinion on gay marriage is not evil and the tendency of liberals to think of people who disagree with them as evil is disturbing.

Yes, just as a white person who speaks publicly in favor of racial segregation is not evil; it's just a different opinion.

[Sava]

Still think a life time ban is excessive.

Disagree.

The market pressure would have driven him out.

It did.

And I bet if we had private conversations from almost any owner, it could be embarrassing.

All NBA owners are racist scumbags? or are the moral equivalent of a racist scumbag?

But my opinion has no impact on my other opinion that the guy is still a douche.

That's something!

[Ben Kenobi]

Just heard the press conference. Commissioner Adam Silver invoked the nuclear option. Three-quarters vote required to force him to sell, and it's a lead-pipe cinch that they have the votes. It's important to remember here that this is essentially a club, with rules, and the participants own franchises, not teams. You can be kicked out of a club if you piss off the other members, within the association's constitution and bylaws. You can disagree with the actions being taken but that, in essence, is what's happening here.

It's a bad precedent. If they kicked out an owner for saying ****ty things, then there wouldn't be a league. Had he said it in public it would be one thing, but taking private communications? I'm sure many of the folks voting for it are deleting emails as we speak.

[Ben Kenobi]

white person who speaks publicly in favor of racial segregation is not evil; it's just a different opinion.

This wasn't public communications, Mr. Fun.

It's kosher now to out someone based on private communications to get them fired? This is the exact same principle.

I have no problem with fining him, but kicking him out is excessive when there's been far worse violations that haven't resulted in a lifetime ban. Heck, the only previous lifetime bans I can think of had to do with gambling. That's it. This isn't even a misdemeanor.

[Sava]

See. You did it again.

[The Mad Monk]

That's what's bothering me about this, too. This was a private conversation that someone else released. It was in no way public, not even in the "oops that mike is live" sense.

[Sava]

just so we cover the free speech angle:

Defending a position by citing free speech is the ultimate concession. Doing so is to admit that the most compelling thing one can say about their position is that it's not literally illegal to express.