felonious monk wrote:
Armstronglivs wrote:
And controversy and negative publicity is good for someone with "mental health issues"? Especially someone who seems to have problems with public/media scrutiny of her actions?
Didn't say that either. Merely pointing out the exposure to her sponsors for her "weakness" is more valuable than what people in our sport do.
She's more famous than any runner. But what does that have to do with her decision to avoid her contractual obligations?
Armstronglivs wrote:
felonious monk wrote:
Didn't say that either. Merely pointing out the exposure to her sponsors for her "weakness" is more valuable than what people in our sport do.
She's more famous than any runner. But what does that have to do with her decision to avoid her contractual obligations?
Bingo. Don’t know why running was brought up. They just don’t have an answer.
Why am I deplorable for bringing up a direct quote from the president?
If you are calling us deplorable for wanting athletes to be held to their contracts, well I guess I am super deplorable and proud of it.
Yawn^2 wrote:
Armstronglivs wrote:
She's more famous than any runner. But what does that have to do with her decision to avoid her contractual obligations?
Bingo. Don’t know why running was brought up. They just don’t have an answer.
Because you were claiming that her sponsors must be livid about this, when in fact it generated a lot of publicity for them, more than anyone participating in the sport commonly discussed on these messageboards. It was an attempt to give you perspective, but I should've known better.
I'm not reading the 10 pages of discussion here. None of you are qualified to criticize her for this. None of you. She would smoke you all in tennis. She would smoke a lot of you in a 400/800 meter run. She is way wealthier than you will ever be. She is a champion. You, on LetsRun, coming at this incredibly talented young woman because she is prioritizing her mental health, are LOSERS.
Shut up and go accomplish something.
reasonableperson001 wrote:
I'm not reading the 10 pages of discussion here. None of you are qualified to criticize her for this. None of you. She would smoke you all in tennis. She would smoke a lot of you in a 400/800 meter run. She is way wealthier than you will ever be. She is a champion. You, on LetsRun, coming at this incredibly talented young woman because she is prioritizing her mental health, are LOSERS.
Shut up and go accomplish something.
Where does the thread title question her talent or achievements?
I haven't read any of the above posts, but I can imagine some athletes find the whole press conference experience an energy sapping, blood pressure raising nightmare. It's a bit like the fear many people have about public speaking.
You know you have no real point to make when you bring up that she makes more money then we do. Ok. So what? Does that mean she can break contracts? Where does it end? Since she is so much more successful then us, is she allowed to spit on me or kill me?
You can have all the money in the world and still be a crappy person or make bad decisions.
Yawn^2 wrote:
You can have all the money in the world and still be a crappy person or make bad decisions.
Correct! Like this thug! A truly terrible person. Wonder if he spoke at the press conference though.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HlgnemTo4TMThey should consider criminal charges for that one
Yawn^2 wrote:
You know you have no real point to make when you bring up that she makes more money then we do. Ok. So what? Does that mean she can break contracts? Where does it end? Since she is so much more successful then us, is she allowed to spit on me or kill me?
You can have all the money in the world and still be a crappy person or make bad decisions.
Anyone is allowed to break a contract. There are just certain penalties for doing so.
She judged that the penalties are not as bad as the cost of the remaining bound to the contract.
You are well versed in hand-waving about cost-benefit analysis I figured you wouldn't be making this point :)
It's funny you specifically bring up money as a non-factor here... because the penalties for breaking the contract are almost entirely monetary. So her current wealth definitely matters here!
8-12 sessions of exposure therapy
2600 bro wrote:
Yawn^2 wrote:
You know you have no real point to make when you bring up that she makes more money then we do. Ok. So what? Does that mean she can break contracts? Where does it end? Since she is so much more successful then us, is she allowed to spit on me or kill me?
You can have all the money in the world and still be a crappy person or make bad decisions.
Anyone is allowed to break a contract. There are just certain penalties for doing so.
She judged that the penalties are not as bad as the cost of the remaining bound to the contract.
You are well versed in hand-waving about cost-benefit analysis I figured you wouldn't be making this point :)
It's funny you specifically bring up money as a non-factor here... because the penalties for breaking the contract are almost entirely monetary. So her current wealth definitely matters here!
You prove you just want to argue with me without reading what I’ve said. Go back to my first several posts. I said that she can walk away from the contract but that there are penalties for doing so. I said that multiple times.
You also completely miss the point about how just because someone is rich does not make them right or superior. Seriously this is your worst effort yet.
Yawn^2 wrote:
They should consider criminal charges for that one
Clean hit.
You've also argued that social anxiety isn't a thing it's just attention seeking, then maybe it is a thing but not if you say you have it, then that her sponsors would not support her, then okay they support her but they also support Kaep so what do they know, then that putting your mental health ahead of your bank account makes you a crappy person, etc. etc. etc.
In short, you've been all over the place.
Just for interest sake, are track and field athletes contract bound to attend press conferences? Again, as I mentioned above, some athletes would find that quite a trial and it would undoubtedly affect their performance so let athletes do their talking on the track...or court...or pitch...or
I didn’t say 99% of that.
Yawn^2 wrote:
2600 bro wrote:
Anyone is allowed to break a contract. There are just certain penalties for doing so.
She judged that the penalties are not as bad as the cost of the remaining bound to the contract.
You are well versed in hand-waving about cost-benefit analysis I figured you wouldn't be making this point :)
It's funny you specifically bring up money as a non-factor here... because the penalties for breaking the contract are almost entirely monetary. So her current wealth definitely matters here!
You prove you just want to argue with me without reading what I’ve said. Go back to my first several posts. I said that she can walk away from the contract but that there are penalties for doing so. I said that multiple times.
You also completely miss the point about how just because someone is rich does not make them right or superior. Seriously this is your worst effort yet.
I was responding to your immediately previous inane post about her wealth.
Value judgements on her actions are allowed but I doubt we will get anywhere discussing them.
You aren't really making a point here. You, in her position, wouldn't take the penalty here, she has shown that she would.
What's great about these normative evaluations is that both sides can feel correct! You think her decision was dumb and shows weakness, she thinks her decision was the best for her career and health.
The question is whose evaluation do I, the objective bystander, trust? The person making the decision or some LRC troll entirely disconnected from the situation?
You tell me.
So you basically have no reason to respond is what you are saying?
Genuinely confused here. I said she can walk away but may face punishment. You agreed.
I said that money does not equal superiority and you said that’s inane? What are you trying to say ?
I don’t think you have a point though; trolls usually don’t.
Yawn^2 wrote:
So you basically have no reason to respond is what you are saying?
Genuinely confused here. I said she can walk away but may face punishment. You agreed.
I said that money does not equal superiority and you said that’s inane? What are you trying to say ?
I don’t think you have a point though; trolls usually don’t.
I'm just saying you're wrong. What's new?