Featured Sterling looses

(Grammar cop) Sterling didn't "loose" anything. Sterling did, however, lose his bid to keep the Clippers.

 

Maybe he loosed his belt.

 

Good, should be over soon.

 

Agreed. No entity, public or private, has the right to control thought, no matter how repulsive it is. It's the world we live in now, however. Employers are demanding access to applicants' Facebook, Twitter and InstaGram profiles as a prerequisite to hiring.

You may not be hired, or you can be fired, for your Facebook, etc. postings. Admittedly some of those are totally ignorant, but is lack of taste and decorum a reason to fire someone from his/her job when that lack of taste and decorum is confined to their private, not job-related, time? Not in my opinion.

Sterling's stupidity was supposed to be private. His gold-digger girlfriend illegally recorded his rant. She's the one who should be sued, as well as charged with violation of California's privacy laws, which require double consent for taping private conversations.

I'd like to see how well Adam silver, or the judge in the case -- heck, let's throw members of Congress in there, too -- would do in the stupidity department if we followed them around with cameras and microphones 24/7. My guess is, Sterling would come off looking like a saint.

 

The problem is that this is not a First Amendment issue. Sterling can say any fool thing he wants. That doesn't mean there won't be repercussions. He was participating in a league that by virtue of his agreement with them, they can make and enforce the rules. As he has Alzheimer's, my heart breaks for him over that. It is a cruel disease.

 

If this man has Alzheimer's, there's no way the 2.5 million fine should be upheld. It should be immediately reversed and the girlfriend, if she had any knowledge of this being a possibility, charged with elder abuse. You don't take advantage of and profit/gain from people who have Alzheimer's.

 

BINGO. The same thing applies for any private business.

 

My social media accounts are only for my own use in sharing with my family and close friends. Every state needs a law like the one we have here in Colorado. (No, not talking about the legal marijuana). :tongue3:

CLICK HERE

 

For those afraid to click the link, here is the law in brief:

Effective May 11, 2013, the Colorado Social Media and the Workplace Law (§ 8-2-127, C.R.S.) prevents employers from accessing employees’ and job applicants’ personal social media accounts.

According to the law (§ 8-2-127, C.R.S.), an employer may not:

1. Suggest, request, or require that an employer or applicant disclose, or cause an employee or applicant to disclose, any user name, password, or other means for accessing the employee's or applicant's personal account or service through the employee’s or applicant's personal electronic communications device.
2. Compel an employee or applicant to add anyone, including the employer or his or her agent, to the employee’s or applicant’s list of contacts associated with a social media account.
3. Require, request, suggest, or cause an employee or applicant to change privacy settings associated with a social networking account.

The law applies to private and public employers in Colorado. The law does not apply to:

1. The Department of Corrections;
2. County corrections departments;
3. Any state or local law enforcement agency.

 

Sure it does if the NBA felt as though the negative press associated with Sterling's behavior would affect the NBA brand, the penalty fit the crime.

There were players talking about not playing. And when the players are talking about not playing if Sterling is not made to sell the team, you've got a PR nightmare that would cost the NBA far more than the Kings were worth.

 

Doesn't matter what our feelings are. If the employment is at will, they can fire you for any reason that's not protected.

Doesn't matter how they found out. They did. And they (the NBA or any employer) can let you go for such things.

I'm sure there's a process that would have to be followed to remove elected officials.

But Sterling had an agreement with the NBA. He knew the rules. If he believed that his Alzheimer's was the reason behind his comments, did his attorney say this?

 

THEY are the ones people are paying to see. I stand firm, the penalty fit. They weren't making billions by folks paying to watch Sterling. Their money comes from people paying to see the players play and for merchandise associated with the teams. If there are no games to watch, and people stop buying the merchandise, they made the right choice.

The penalty more than fit.

 

It was an empty threat. They'll play.

It's easy money and they want it. Most of them, in spite of their overblown salaries, are still only a missed paycheck or two away from financial calamity.

 

It's the Clippers actually.

 

Eh ... not so much.

He can't keep the facts straight, but he knows more about the facts than any of us.

Typical liberal ... don't let facts stand in the way of a good rant.