The Boston Celtics have suspended head coach Ime Udoka for the entire 2022-23 season.

[CHICAGO]

There you go being wrong as hell with confidence. It was clearly stated multiple times that there was investigation launched that took two months to complete by an outside firm.

GETCHO ASS IN HERE
ALONG WITH GOOFY ASS @Gil Scott-Heroin

shyt HAPPENED JUST LIKE I SAID...
THEY fukkED, BOSTON KNEW
AND DIDNT DO shyt UNTIL SEPTEMBER
AFTER SHE BROUGHT UP SOME
CRUDE COMMENTS FROM LAST SPRING.

CRAKKKAS PERFORMED
A PUBLIC LYNCHING AND MADE
AN EXAMPLE OUT OF THIS nikka.




​

 

[Gil Scott-Heroin]

GETCHO ASS IN HERE
ALONG WITH GOOFY ASS @Gil Scott-Heroin

shyt HAPPENED JUST LIKE I SAID...
THEY fukkED, BOSTON KNEW
AND DIDNT DO shyt UNTIL SEPTEMBER
WHEN YOU BROUGHT UP SOME
CRUDE COMMENTS FROM LAST SPRING.




​

Shams is telling the exact story that was discussed when we last had an exchange in here. Do you wanna tell me what has changed? What further details are there into exactly what happened?

 

[CHICAGO]

Shams is telling the exact story that was discussed when we last had an exchange in here. Do you wanna tell me what has changed? What further details are there into exactly what happened?

LETS GO OVER THIS AGAIN...

THEY STARTED fukkING
DURING THE PLAYOFFS.

BOSTON FOUND OUT IN JULY,
BOTH SIDES SAID IT WAS CONSENSUAL.

SHE CONTINUED TO fukk/ WORK
UNDER HIM UNTIL SEPTEMBER
AKA UNTIL NIA MOVED TO BOSTON
THEN SHE WENT TO THE COMPANY
AND SAID HE MADE CRUDE COMMENTS
BEFORE THEY STARTED fukkING
AND THEY SUSPENDED HIM
FOR A YR....

NOW TELL ME
HOW DOES THIS LINE UP
WITH ALL THE shyt YOU
INSINUATED IN THIS THREAD?

TELL ME HOW IS THIS
WORTH A 1 YR SUSPENSION
SINCE YOU WERE dikk SUCKING
THE CELTICS ORGANIZATION?


​

 

[Gil Scott-Heroin]

LETS GO OVER THIS AGAIN...

THEY STARTED fukkING
DURING THE PLAYOFFS.

BOSTON FOUND OUT IN JULY,
BOTH SIDES SAID IT WAS CONSENSUAL.

SHE CONTINUED TO fukk/ WORK
UNDER HIM UNTIL SEPTEMBER
AKA UNTIL NIA MOVED TO BOSTON
THEN SHE WENT TO THE COMPANY
AND SAID HE MADE CRUDE COMMENTS
BEFORE THEY STARTED fukkING
AND THEY SUSPENDED HIM
FOR A YR....

NOW TELL ME
HOW DOES THIS LINE UP
WITH ALL THE shyt YOU
INSINUATED IN THIS THREAD.

TELL ME HOW IS THIS
WORTH A 1 YR SUSPENSION
SINCE YOU WERE dikk SUCKING
THE CELTICS ORGANIZATION?


​

I'll quote myself since literally nothing has changed or made known (publicly) that we didn't already know since you last embarrassed yourself in here:

It's pretty self-explanatory.

You believed it didn't make any sense, at all, that it could possibly be sexual harassment as he'd be fired, but now you're entertaining the possibility it could be framed as "sexual harassment". It speaks to the entanglement of mental gymnastics you've got yourself into in this thread. I made sense of the situation as it occurring after the consensual relationship (as everyone did in the thread), as it typically does in these instances; that doesn't take away from the notion of it being sexual harassment, regardless, if it occurred before or after.

You're the one who switched up his shyt.

Furthermore, it'd be remiss to think just because it occurred before that it doesn't have the same gravity (as after), as women in lower-ranking positions can easily fall victim into being preyed upon, putting themselves in a position where they enter a "consensual relationship" out of fear of losing their jobs or their reputations being marred. Now, that's not to say that's what happened here, but this is the reason why workplace relationships, particularly when it involves a subordinate are not only frowned upon but forbidden.

Even if Udoka is relatively innocent in all this (in a moral sense), then the punishment of a one-year suspension and his place in the NBA forever tainted, is justified, if only for the fact it'll scare coaches or any high-ranking personnel from going down the same path (where it leads to more devastating consequences).

Read the bold, in particular.

You ran into this thread thinking what Shams said is some smoking gun, when it's the same damn story that's been in rotation for 1-2 weeks now. Then you came with some half-baked militant shyt about how the Celtics are trying to make an example out of this Black man, and I told you:

Is there any precedent to the Celtics reprimanding a coach for sleeping with subordinates? Do the Celtics have a history of punishing Black coaches more, and to what end, given they've provided a platform for Black men to showcase their coaching abilities more than any other franchise? If not, then how could you possibly believe they're simply putting a Black man in his place, especially when you're none the wiser as to what the full story is?

Your confirmation bias won't allow you to ever accept any further detail coming out as worthy of a one-year suspension.

The Celtics are out here putting a nxgga in his place, but then they go and promote another Black man to take over as interim coach.



Unless you believe the organization is conducting some racial experiment of putting Black men in power and making examples out of them to stop them ever moving up in society, in sacrifice of actually winning anything, well....

And then as per usual, you ran off into the shadows once your shyt was debunked.

 

[CHICAGO]

I'll quote myself since literally nothing has changed or made known (publicly) that we didn't already know since you last embarrassed yourself in here:

Read the bold, in particular.

You ran into this thread thinking what Shams said is some smoking gun, when it's the same damn story that's been in rotation for 1-2 weeks now. Then you came with some half-baked militant shyt about how the Celtics are trying to make an example of this out Black man, and I told you:


And then as per usual, you ran off into the shadows once your shyt was debunked.

NO nikka.

I DIDNT READ A THING YOU POSTED
AFTER YOU CLAIM I SWITCHED IT UP...

NOW THAT I HAVE
THE REALITY IS YOURE THE
ONE THAT SWITCHED IT UP.

DO I HAVE TO DIG UP POSTS
SURROUNDING THE UNWANTED
"NON CONSENSUAL lol" COMMENTS
THAT YOU THOUGHT WERE
MADE AFTER THEY STOPPED fukkING?

SO NOW YOURE SAYING
HIS "CRUDE COMMENTS"
COULD HAVE PRESSURED HER
INTO A RELATIONSHIP...

YOU HAVE NO SHAME.


​

 

[GOAT]

Gil Cac-Heroin trying to figure out ways to demonize black men:

 

[Gil Scott-Heroin]

NO nikka.

I DIDNT READ A THING YOU POSTED
AFTER YOU CLAIM I SWITCHED IT UP...

NOW THAT I HAVE
THE REALITY IS YOURE THE
ONE THAT SWITCHED IT UP.

DO I HAVE TO DIG UP POSTS
SURROUNDING THE UNWANTED
"NON CONSENSUAL lol" COMMENTS
THAT YOU THOUGHT WERE
MADE AFTER THEY STOPPED fukkING?




​

Lord have mercy.

You know if you actually read what I posted instead of acting like a cotdamn child because I called you out on your bullshyt, you'd realize I actually addressed this a week ago, and then I just quoted it above to show you again. Why are you so intent on embarrassing yourself, being dishonest and childish?

Do I need to post it a third time?

It's pretty self-explanatory.

You believed it didn't make any sense, at all, that it could possibly be sexual harassment as he'd be fired, but now you're entertaining the possibility it could be framed as "sexual harassment". It speaks to the entanglement of mental gymnastics you've got yourself into in this thread. I made sense of the situation as it occurring after the consensual relationship (as everyone did in the thread), as it typically does in these instances; that doesn't take away from the notion of it being sexual harassment, regardless, if it occurred before or after.

You're the one who switched up his shyt.

Furthermore, it'd be remiss to think just because it occurred before that it doesn't have the same gravity (as after), as women in lower-ranking positions can easily fall victim into being preyed upon, putting themselves in a position where they enter a "consensual relationship" out of fear of losing their jobs or their reputations being marred. Now, that's not to say that's what happened here, but this is the reason why workplace relationships, particularly when it involves a subordinate are not only frowned upon but forbidden.

Even if Udoka is relatively innocent in all this (in a moral sense), then the punishment of a one-year suspension and his place in the NBA forever tainted, is justified, if only for the fact it'll scare coaches or any high-ranking personnel from going down the same path (where it leads to more devastating consequences).

I'm always one step ahead of you.

 

[Gil Scott-Heroin]

Gil Cac-Heroin trying to figure out ways to demonize black men:

You're trying too hard, white boy. No amount of dap-seeking behavior will cover up for the fact you're an actor (a poor one at that).

 

[GOAT]

Cac babble

 

[Gil Scott-Heroin]

Your complete lack of self-awareness is on full display in here.

Here you are co-opting a stance around a Black man, which is a serious topic and should be treated as such, but then you go and trivialize it by trying to make a joke out of it, where you're not interested in any actual discourse around the matter, but solely seeking out daps, which you compound either further by resorting to the same damn embarrassing juvenile response of altering my text and replying with nothing but a smilie.

In the effort of trying to shame me, you're only exposing yourself.

You'll prove my point by doing the exact same thing again.

 

[CHICAGO]

Lord have mercy.

You know if you actually read what I posted instead of acting like a cotdamn child because I called you out on your bullshyt, you'd realize I actually addressed this a week ago, and then I just quoted it above to show you again. Why are you so intent on embarrassing yourself, being dishonest and childish?

Do I need to post it a third time?

I'm always one step ahead of you.

NO nikka.

I DIDNT READ A THING YOU POSTED
AFTER YOU CLAIM I SWITCHED IT UP...

NOW THAT I HAVE
THE REALITY IS YOURE THE
ONE THAT SWITCHED IT UP.

DO I HAVE TO DIG UP POSTS
SURROUNDING THE UNWANTED
"NON CONSENSUAL lol" COMMENTS
THAT YOU THOUGHT WERE
MADE AFTER THEY STOPPED fukkING?

SO NOW YOURE SAYING
HIS "CRUDE COMMENTS"
COULD HAVE PRESSURED HER
INTO A RELATIONSHIP...

YOU HAVE NO SHAME.
:

​

​

 

[GOAT]

Unhinged cac diatribe

 

[Gil Scott-Heroin]

​

Is there any point to you quoting my post where I addressed what you said (for what is the fourth-fifth time), and you reply with the same post of yours?


"Furthermore, it'd be remiss to think just because it occurred before that it doesn't have the same gravity (as after), as women in lower-ranking positions can easily fall victim into being preyed upon, putting themselves in a position where they enter a "consensual relationship" out of fear of losing their jobs or their reputations being marred. Now, that's not to say that's what happened here, but this is the reason why workplace relationships, particularly when it involves a subordinate are not only frowned upon but forbidden.

Even if Udoka is relatively innocent in all this (in a moral sense), then the punishment of a one-year suspension and his place in the NBA forever tainted, is justified, if only for the fact it'll scare coaches or any high-ranking personnel from going down the same path (where it leads to more devastating consequences)."

Do you not see me clearly stating that regardless of Udoka's culpability in all this, that this suspension is for the greater cause of protecting folks who're in vulnerable positions in the NBA workplace (particularly women)? Here you are, not even knowing exactly what went on, but you're convinced that it isn't worth a one-year suspension. What would be an appropriate punishment for Udoka over a matter you don't know the details of? Would you factor in deterring high-ranking personnel from committing the same mistake?

Furthermore, who's to say that the length of suspension isn't meaningless here, and the damage he's done, and trust he's broken, is beyond repair?

This is what happens when you can't see the bigger picture, all because you're too busy fighting some boogeyman that you and the rest of the keyboard militants on this board have conjured up.

 

[MikelArteta]

Free ime

 

[Gil Scott-Heroin]

Another factor the length of the suspension hasn't been talked about enough is, the [interim] coach and the playing group can get on with the job at hand, not having to worry about their rhythm and whatever they build being upset with a change of coach and approach midway through the season, and all the questions/drama that it would bring on his impending return.

Now that Udoka won't be a factor in their season, they can concentrate without that distraction.

The length of the suspension doesn't have to be all about what he deserves or doesn't deserve.