It's a little different in the case of an owner and there are other steps that could have been taken first.
It's not really any different. You embarrass you company, you get kicked out of the company. He embarrassed the NBA, he is getting kicked out. Sure, they could have done other things, but they don't have to. It's their choice.
The butterfly of the matter is that we don't know he did anything. You can't convict someone cuz they look like they did it, you need the butterflies to prove that they did. In this case, those butterflies aren't there.
Then it's good he isn't being convicted. Then again, the NBA doesn't convict anyone. It makes business decision and it has made one based on the evidence they have. From what I heard on NPR, this guy admitted to the commissioner it was him saying those things.
And, for the record, the butterfly is that I have said I believe he did what those folks that sued him said he did. There's no proof outside of what they said, though, and hearsay should never be enough to 'convict' someone.
Well, that we know of, but I'm betting there was enough proof to convict him, which is why he settled instead of going to court.
Nope, Fight Pass.
Bro? Players refuse to play until they're traded from time to time. Plus this could easily be considered a special case by the NBA and NBPA.
It could, but the fact is they still have contracts. The guys that refuse to play until they get traded may also have something in their contracts. Otherwise, they are probably losing money, and they can't play for another team.
When 'everything else' amounts to 'crap some people said', well, I don't think it's enough.
Sure, and if it was just this, I'd say, maybe you got a point. However, this guy has a history of this stuff. It's not something that is recent either. And those two incidents aren't the only ones. So yeah, when so many people say you've said or done something to them for so long, there may be something to it.
That it happens does not make it right. Social norms have also been responsible for some terrible stuff, Adolf.
Well, technically Adolf changed the social norm, and not everyone believed it was right. Some just followed it out of fear. In the case of the NBA and this guy, yeah, no one is getting killed. I'm pretty sure there is a difference somewhere in there.
dood, as far as we know he didn't do anything. He was accused, not convicted. He was never ordered to even pay anyone compensation of any sort ... cuz he settled. There is no proof whatsoever that he ever discriminated against an employee or customer in his NBA business - something people continue to avoid discussing for some reason.
Right, because he settled. I'm pretty sure if there was no proof, he wouldn't have settled.