Remember, the dumb little kid is asserting that the NBA actually put a legal term into a legally binding document that doesn't mean what it says.
At least according to our resident idiot.
Actually they put it in terms where it doesn't matter whether he meant to do it or not...
13(d) Fail or refuse to fulfill its contractual obligations to
the Association, its Members, Players, or any other third party in such a
way as to affect the Association or its Members adversely.
Lol, that's according to federal/state laws. Not according to the NBA Constitution. The NBA owners do not need to prove if he knew or didn't know that he was being recorded. Means absolutely nothing according to their Association.
Like I said, you know very little about just everything. Lol. Willful in the context of the NBA Constitution simply means he committed an act that adversely affects the Association. They don't even need to prove it.
It's one thing to be completely ignorant but it's another thing altogether to take pride in it. It's comical how wrong you are.
You have shown your complete inability to comprehend even the most simple and basic legal concepts. Here you show you don't even know the definition of a simple word.
Just because you say something doesn't make it true. You just repeat nonsense and cite to nothing and assume its true. You're a lunatic.
seriously? Now you want to make dozens of posts about that the fact i made a typo? Weird man.
Sterling's interview "apology" with Anderson Cooper was just as damaging and probably would be more appropriate for Silver to talk about. He attacked a prominent basketball ambassador, former coach, announcer, by inaccurately saying he had "Those AIDS"
Send this to the rubber room, what a disgraceful display of immaturity.
I was incorrect about the meaning of willful in the context of this discussion. I'll admit that. I forgot article 13(d) didn't mention willful at all and the Constitution does not specify that the owners need to prove he willfully violated the NBA Constitution as the verbiage does not say he has to willfully violate the Constitution for the owners to kick him out.
I told you about 20 pages ago you had the context of willful incorrect and you just called me dumb. Now you admit it on page 34?
Nice. Carry on this discussion. It's interesting yet stupid all at once.
Well it's all a matter of semantics and I was using it incorrectly, I will admit that. Since the NBA Constitution is different than the court of law I figured their interpretation of willful intent does not have to be proven to kick him out. Therefore willful means...
deliberate, voluntary, or intentional
And the actions he committed, even though were private... were deliberate and voluntary and intentional. Where I will concede I was wrong was that his actions didn't "willfully" violate the NBA Constitution. Although he willfully acted like a racist. And the owners do not need to prove he willfully violated the NBA Constitution so I made the mistake of thinking the NBA has to prove he willfully committed actions that affected the NBA whether he meant to or not. So even though it's not a big deal, I understand how people will take it. So you can just take the "willfully" part out of my argument and it remains the same.
You are totally missing the point. It's not that his COMMENTS were deliberate, voluntary and intentional...that's not the issue. Willfully comes in when you discuss what the intentions of his comments were. Was he WILLFULLY attempting to disparage the NBA with those comments?
The answer is clearly "no."