If I were a particular NBA big man looking to get a trade out of New Orleans (no one in particular), I'd want to go to the Celtics, the house that Bill Russell built. This is not me selfishly begging @AntDavis23 to go to the Celtics at all.
@HuskerPwrGaming Well if that's the question then I'd agree. If they say "sorry, but you're a republican" then obviously that's a terrible reason to deny anyone anything.
@HuskerPwrGaming It depends. If they're on a list from the government that gets flagged during the opening process it wouldn't (I'm assuming here). I don't know much about banking, another reason I say I'd need more context before definitely saying yes or no to the original question.
@HuskerPwrGaming No I meant they couldn't force the league to actually do anything. Input in terms of policy. If they wanna vote with their wallets, that's their right.
@HuskerPwrGaming I'm using that as an example as to why publicly shared companies don't have to vote on things covered in their TOS. Not comparing it to the Facebook situation but to say that Facebook doesn't need a vote to ban people.
@HuskerPwrGaming As for whether the others, like Jones, violated TOS, it's the same thing. One of the terms is that use of the platform can be revoked.
@HuskerPwrGaming The problem with the NFLs policy is that it's up to the team and league to determine whether Kap made them look bad. Their wording of that policy leaves the final say to them, not the fans.
@HuskerPwrGaming I don't think anyone should be banned. I also don't think the president should tell private companies (NFL) what to do, like Trump did with the NFL. Private business should be free from government interference except in obvious circumstances (race, gender, religion, etc)
@HuskerPwrGaming See, that's where you're assumption got the best of you. I never said those people should be banned. I said that the arguments used by people are hypocritical