Thomas asked cheerleaders to flirt with refs

[Dan_ref]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

I've heard that access to the NBA officials' locker room is heavily restricted. NO VISITORS is posted on the door.

I doubt that such a comment, if made, was serious.

Are you lawyer or a publicist for Isiah?

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by Dan_ref

Are you lawyer or a publicist for Isiah?

Obviously not. My point is that since Isaiah has been a player, coach and executive in the NBA, he is well aware that cheerleaders would not be allowed access to the officials' dressing area. Therefore, if the comment was indeed made, it was made with the knowledge that the cheerleader could not carry it out.

[Dan_ref]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

Obviously not.

Why is that obvious?

My point is that since Isaiah has been a player, coach and executive in the NBA, he is well aware that cheerleaders would not be allowed access to the officials' dressing area. Therefore, if the comment was indeed made, it was made with the knowledge that the cheerleader could not carry it out.

I can't see how your point lets you conclude that the comment was not made or if it was it was just an innocent joke. Unless of course you're a lawyer or publicist for Isaiah.

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by Dan_ref

I can't see how your point lets you conclude that the comment was not made or if it was it was just an innocent joke.

I concluded neither of those things. I said merely:

I doubt that such a comment, if made, was serious.

It seems more likely to me, given that Isaiah undoubtedly knows the extremely low possibility of a cheerleader gaining access to the officials' locker room and then "making them happy", that he did not make such a suggestion with the intent that it be carried out.

[Dan_ref]

I said

I can't see how your point lets you conclude that the comment was not made or if it was it was just an innocent joke.

You responded by saying

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

I concluded neither of those things.

IOW you concluded it was not an innocent joke and he probably did say it.

You elaborated further

It seems more likely to me, given that Isaiah undoubtedly knows the extremely low possibility of a cheerleader gaining access to the officials' locker room and then "making them happy", that he did not make such a suggestion with the intent that it be carried out.

So in your opinion a high ranking executive of a multi-billion dollar corporation told a low level female emplyeee to go flirt with someone even though he knew it would be impossible and he was serious about it (ie not joking).

Yeah, good thing you're not his lawyer after all.

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by Dan_ref

IOW you concluded it was not an innocent joke and he probably did say it.

From the above sentence, I conclude that your skills of deduction need some fine tuning. The fact that I do not conclude something does NOT entail that I conclude the opposite. What I said, and still believe, is that if the comment was made, I doubt that it was intended to be taken seriously.

So in your opinion a high ranking executive of a multi-billion dollar corporation (1) told a low level female emplyeee to go flirt with someone even though he knew it would be impossible and (2) he was serious about it (ie not joking).

(1) I think this possible. But it's also possible that the story is completely fabricated by a disgruntled employee. I have no idea which is true.

(2) If the statement was made, I doubt that it was meant to be taken seriously.

That's what I've been saying all along. I'm not sure why you're trying so hard to give me a hard time about it.

[Dan_ref]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

From the above sentence, I conclude that your skills of deduction need some fine tuning. The fact that I do not conclude something does NOT entail that I conclude the opposite.

OK, so educate me.

Where did I say you conclude the opposite?

All I did was point out based on what you wrote that you reject both of the possible conclusions I offered. I merely eliminated those 2 from the potentially limitless list of what you could have possibly been thinking.

How does my eliminating those mere 2 out of the many possibilities entail that you actually conclude only the opposite of those 2 guesses?

(1) I think this possible. But it's also possible that the story is completely fabricated by a disgruntled employee. I have no idea which is true.

(2) If the statement was made, I doubt that it was meant to be taken seriously.

That's what I've been saying all along. I'm not sure why you're trying so hard to give me a hard time about it.

Because you're using an completely independant and irrelevant fact (pre-game security is high) to defend Isaiah's stupid behavior. I believe he did tell that cheerleader to go flirt with the referees. I don't think he cared one bit about how possible or impossible that might have been to accomplish. I believe he actually thought he could have gotten at least some tiny benefit out of it and I'll give him the benefit of the doubt and say that at best he was half-serious. To me, he came just short of jokingly telling the cheerleader to promise to f@ck the officials after the game because it might help him win. And you're defending that. Oh well...

Of course, given what you and I both know about the case my opinion is as good as yours...or maybe there's some other little known skill of deduction you can help me understand...

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

But it's also possible that the story is completely fabricated by a disgruntled employee.

If I owned a pig farm....and one of my pigs got laryngitis......would that pig be a disgruntled employee too?