NBA "owner" Controversy

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Indus

Diamond Member
May 11, 2002
5,923
1,630
136
It's hard to say someone is truly an owner after what the NBA fired the clippers owner a few years back?
 

DrDoug

Diamond Member
Jan 16, 2014
3,543
1,505
136
Hey snowflake, how about you let them call themselves whatever they want, it doesn’t affect you in the slightest.

It is frankly amazing how easily triggered you are by even the smallest thing.
He's not a snowflake, he's a one-man avalanche. If he was a gun he'd be going off in his holster. If Roy Rogers was here he would feed him oats and scratch his ears.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Meghan54

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
48,778
3,005
126
The article(s) specifically calls the reason behind this is because it is racially insensitive and dates back to slavery. It is all about racism.

Yes or no- Is the NBA going to disallow the term "owner", not teams, not if some think it should be dropped. When is this going into effect if you agree with the title and who announced this WILL be happening?

If the answer is "yes" I suggest you have a long row to hoe ahead of you.
 

UNCjigga

Lifer
Dec 12, 2000
20,317
2,233
126
Can we talk about what really matters...how did Toronto completely screw their final possession last night and lose their best shot to win a championship at home??? I swear I saw 2 raptors tangled up with a single defender, while Leonard was double teamed and didn’t really have an outlet. Ughh.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Thebobo

brandonbull

Diamond Member
May 3, 2005
5,092
390
126
Hey snowflake, how about you let them call themselves whatever they want, it doesn’t affect you in the slightest.

It is frankly amazing how easily triggered you are by even the smallest thing.
That's funny because next week you will be calling white business owners racist because they refer to themselves as "owners" while having POC employees.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
63,798
10,997
126
That's funny because next week you will be calling white business owners racist because they refer to themselves as "owners" while having POC employees.
By all means feel free to quote this and totally own me when that happens.

You will be waiting a very long time. Lol.
 

cytg111

Diamond Member
Mar 17, 2008
9,897
2,090
136
That's funny because next week you will be calling white business owners racist because they refer to themselves as "owners" while having POC employees.
You alt right freaks a literally picking on some alt left personages that are just not here. You try to create them out of thin air and when that doesnt work you just pretend that it works, shits all over the place and then struts around like you have won something... Congrats.
 

interchange

Diamond Member
Oct 10, 1999
5,720
1,024
126
I have no desire to kick him off the forums. That said, one earns respect and that is not limited to an individual post or thread. Having a contrary opinion to the established norm here would be commendable, IF and only if there is a factual basis to support it. Personally I have no fear of words, even those we can't type here if understood in a context with a purpose other than attacking a minority, as an example.
I once wrote a piece called "Respect is not Earned". It was more relating to the raising of children, but it applies universally. I think though respect is not a word with a clear definition. I would say the converse would be dehumanization. Even psychotic people with overt break in reality have reasoning behind them that is understandable on some human level even if you are not capable of understanding this reasoning. They deserve respect for their autonomous choices, even when you must restrict it because it would be unsafe to do otherwise. I believe that our nation was founded as a consequence of this lack of respect, and I don't find our forefather's particularly virtuous save for their attempt to protect this value.

People have become too sensitive IMO and punishment for violating their standards sometimes goes overboard. But Trump having an appeal on that? OK, he's not afraid to call a spade a spade as it were in any context one might name. That's hardly the point because there's an inherent viciousness and dishonesty, being "real" by invoking lies which are swallowed whole.
I think, if you chose to see Trump supporters as people driven by human motivations rather than desiring evilness you might be surprised to find some pretty basic and not so detestable reasons for being drawn to Trump. And then if you place yourself in the position of someone who has publicly aligned themselves with him and imagine what you would be forced to embrace as a public view of who you are as a person where you to choose to leave him, you'd see our present circumstances as human tragedy and not human evil.

Therefore you should expect that while embracing such philosophies is permitted and expressed in not so veiled sentiments here, it should be expected that there will be harsh condemnation and suspicion justly warranted by history.
I hope also that you recognize I pull no punches in highlighting the dangers of Trump's behavior. One does not have to dehumanize someone they disagree with to be harshly critical of their position. I also think that one of the most valuable things a person can do is empathize with such a person. You can learn a lot about yourself that way.
 

interchange

Diamond Member
Oct 10, 1999
5,720
1,024
126
I have gotten very tired of the ‘conservatives voted for Trump because liberals were mean to them’ argument. There is not one single shred of empirical evidence for this.

Related, despite the vastly more toxic and vitriolic treatment of liberals by conservative media spanning decades you never see the opposite argument that in order to prevent Democrats from being elected conservatives should be nicer to liberals.

As others said, respect is earned and not given and Spidey’s habitual dishonesty has squandered the default respect that people get. I do not respect his contribution because it is made in manifestly bad faith. Deciding to respect purposeful liars in the same way as honest brokers is part of the disease, not the cure.
That's not the argument I was attempting to make. It has nothing to do with political activities and reflects overall societal norms.
 

HomerJS

Lifer
Feb 6, 2002
19,660
4,866
136
Can we talk about what really matters...how did Toronto completely screw their final possession last night and lose their best shot to win a championship at home??? I swear I saw 2 raptors tangled up with a single defender, while Leonard was double teamed and didn’t really have an outlet. Ughh.
The big mistake KL was on a roll and torched the Warriers for 12 points with about 3 minutes to go. The idiot Raptors manager calls a timeout. Totally broke his team's momentum. After that Warriors went on a 9-0 run.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
63,798
10,997
126
That's not the argument I was attempting to make. It has nothing to do with political activities and reflects overall societal norms.
I mean you explicitly said 'maybe Trump wouldn't be president if people like Slow were shown more respect' so it's hard to see how you weren't trying to make that connection. What else should I infer?

Regardless, sanction of antisocial behavior such as deliberate dishonesty is a positive societal norm we should continue to reinforce. I would say one of the greatest casualties of the Trump era is that people have learned they can lie without consequence, counting on the reluctance of society to do anything about it. I respect Slowspyder's right to make his own choices to lie to us but one of the most important parts of freedom is both the ability to choose AND the acceptance of consequences for that choice. I consider it morally wrong to have one without the other.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DarthKyrie

interchange

Diamond Member
Oct 10, 1999
5,720
1,024
126
I mean you explicitly said 'maybe Trump wouldn't be president if people like Slow were shown more respect' so it's hard to see how you weren't trying to make that connection. What else should I infer?
I think the most key part of this equation is that the vast majority of Americans have very little knowledge of politics and investment in political principle underlying their affiliations which are often tenuous anyway. The organization into left-right was galvanized by Trump, but before then there was a whole bunch of people who were relatively more bothered by the societal norms which put pressure on them to repress some of their deviance. They organized around Trump, but many were not really politically fixed or motivated to politically participated prior to him.

Regardless, sanction of antisocial behavior such as deliberate dishonesty is a positive societal norm we should continue to reinforce. I would say one of the greatest casualties of the Trump era is that people have learned they can lie without consequence, counting on the reluctance of society to do anything about it. I respect Slowspyder's right to make his own choices to lie to us but one of the most important parts of freedom is both the ability to choose AND the acceptance of consequences for that choice. I consider it morally wrong to have one without the other.
Do you think I'm reinforcing antisocial behavior? I think if you look at the fruits of my manner of interaction and the fruits of a more aggressive and personal attack, you will find mine to support subsequent interactions with more pro-social behavior. As I said earlier, I do not refrain from condemning reprehensible acts and ideas. Do you disagree?

Bluntly put, I think you don't truly know why you attack @SlowSpyder so automatically and harshly.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
63,798
10,997
126
I think the most key part of this equation is that the vast majority of Americans have very little knowledge of politics and investment in political principle underlying their affiliations which are often tenuous anyway. The organization into left-right was galvanized by Trump, but before then there was a whole bunch of people who were relatively more bothered by the societal norms which put pressure on them to repress some of their deviance. They organized around Trump, but many were not really politically fixed or motivated to politically participated prior to him.
Political polarization might be modestly worse now than it was in the past but it is a marginal change at best. Trump is not a cause of it, he is an effect of it. All he showed was just how deep the rot was.

Do you think I'm reinforcing antisocial behavior? I think if you look at the fruits of my manner of interaction and the fruits of a more aggressive and personal attack, you will find mine to support subsequent interactions with more pro-social behavior. As I said earlier, I do not refrain from condemning reprehensible acts and ideas. Do you disagree?
I think if you believe that attempting to engage more positively with SlowSpyder will lead him to be less dishonest you will be disappointed. I do think not sanctioning purposeful dishonesty has second order effects that are toxic for society as we've seen over the last four years.

Bluntly put, I think you don't truly know why you attack @SlowSpyder so automatically and harshly.
First, I don't think it is productive or fair to say I don't know my own motivations as that's something not open to rebuttal.

Second, I don't think my motivations are difficult to understand at all: I find him purposefully dishonest in the service of a corrupt racist's agenda, which is profoundly immoral. There's no point in attempting positive engagement with someone who has no interest in it, but there is value in pointing out what he's doing to other people.
 
  • Like
Reactions: darkswordsman17

brandonbull

Diamond Member
May 3, 2005
5,092
390
126
You alt right freaks a literally picking on some alt left personages that are just not here. You try to create them out of thin air and when that doesnt work you just pretend that it works, shits all over the place and then struts around like you have won something... Congrats.
I guess "alt-right" freaks are up to conspiracy theories on how "illegal aliens" are now just "immigrants"? If nothing else, Progressheviks are unwavering in their efforts with changing semantics to fit their goal of a totalitarian utopia.
 
Nov 25, 2013
29,294
10,022
136
https://www.dailywire.com/news/47991/nba-teams-looking-drop-owner-title-amid-concerns-emily-zanotti

https://nypost.com/2019/06/03/nba-teams-moving-away-from-owner-title/

In yet another example of creating racism where there was none, the NBA in their virtuous ways are dropping the term "owner" to describe the person that owns the team. Governor, chairman, managing partner... new terms will be used. So virtuous. Only a fool would suggest that the term "owner" would mean that the players are owned. If I worked for a small company that had a single owner, I worked for the owner. No one in their right mind would question whether or not I am property of that person or an employee, but this is the world we live in, the inmates run the asylum.

Thread title edited for accuracy.
Perknose
Forum Director
#fuckofftroll
 

cytg111

Diamond Member
Mar 17, 2008
9,897
2,090
136
I guess "alt-right" freaks are up to conspiracy theories on how "illegal aliens" are now just "immigrants"? If nothing else, Progressheviks are unwavering in their efforts with changing semantics to fit their goal of a totalitarian utopia.
I refer you to the OP. This is a thread about how awful it is that someone shifts semantics in said context and NOT about how this change is over due. The negated version of what Slow is posting ... Is not here.
This is what Slow is doing over and over and over .. and over again. The left he is looking for... is not here.
 

interchange

Diamond Member
Oct 10, 1999
5,720
1,024
126
First, I don't think it is productive or fair to say I don't know my own motivations as that's something not open to rebuttal.
Perhaps a better thing to say would be that I believe your motivation to be quite different than what you have provided as justification for your behavior. But I don't mean for that to be the end of the conversation. If you're curious about what I think, I'm more than happy to share and open to your response.

There are some behaviors which appear to have quite straightforward purpose but actually are non-productive for that apparent purpose. One simplistic way of rationalizing the behavior is that people who engage in it are dumb and keep trying something that isn't working. But even dumb people are quite smart. That's a very bad rationalization. So it means some other purpose must exist for which the behavior is productive.

As a matter of example, do you think anyone ever gets laid by catcalling?
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
63,798
10,997
126
Perhaps a better thing to say would be that I believe your motivation to be quite different than what you have provided as justification for your behavior. But I don't mean for that to be the end of the conversation. If you're curious about what I think, I'm more than happy to share and open to your response.
Yes, I understood what you meant. It's not an interesting or productive conversation to me though.

There are some behaviors which appear to have quite straightforward purpose but actually are non-productive for that apparent purpose. One simplistic way of rationalizing the behavior is that people who engage in it are dumb and keep trying something that isn't working. But even dumb people are quite smart. That's a very bad rationalization. So it means some other purpose must exist for which the behavior is productive.

As a matter of example, do you think anyone ever gets laid by catcalling?
You appear to belive my goal here is to change SlowSpyder's behavior when I've already told you that's not the case?
 
  • Like
Reactions: darkswordsman17

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
24,848
4,563
126
I won't speak on behalf of @SlowSpyder although it seems that most people here don't share some tension around doing so.

I do think that it is wrong to sow left-right divisions here, but they are being reinforced with the behavior displayed in the thread. That's unfortunate. It provides some validity to the idea that such attention to politically correct terminology is a liberal issue.

While I agree that I don't care what owners want to call themselves, this is a case where they are capitulating to social pressure which I think needs a place for challenge. Just because this particular example lacks any significant ramifications doesn't mean it shouldn't spark debate. I think the lack of a true discourse on this kind of issue nationally is a big reason why Trump is so appealing to so many. Maybe he wouldn't be president if people like @SlowSpyder were shown more respect. Not necessarily agreement. I disagree with nearly everything he posts here, but I do respect his contribution and advocate for his right to be heard no differently than anyone else.
So you think we should entertain his outrage because you believe someone else's outrage is too much and yet you don't seem to care to talk about the original outrage?

I guess if you are one of those people that believes everyone's opinion is worth listening to then I can see where you are coming from. For me personally, everyone's opinion isn't worth listening to, especially if I know their history and their penchant for discussing things in bad faith.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY