Re: What's the difference between Kobe and Vin? Are you SERIOUS??

[Cecil <cecil@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Perhaps, but that was not the vein that his case was mentioned in.  It had
nothing to do with the balance of power in the other conference.  If it
were, shouldn't we be discussing the other Lacker acquisitions?  It was
about his lack of restraint in having relations with someone other than his
wife, I thought.  Maybe I am mistaken though.

I take no joy in any of these kinds of incidents taking place with anyone
including our own guys who were charged within the past few years.  But at
least, those were Celtic-related.

Cecil (hates the Lackers)

----- Original Message -----
From: Shawn Niles <shizzjr@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <cecil@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; <Celtics@xxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, October 13, 2003 6:13 PM
Subject: Re: What's the difference between Kobe and Vin? Are you SERIOUS??


> It does in the sense that Kobe is just entering the prime of his career
and
> the outcome of this case will affect how good the Lakers are, and where
the
> power lies in the western conference.
>
> OJ was long since retired when his case broke.
>
>
> >From: Cecil <cecil@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >To: Celtics@xxxxxxxx
> >Subject: Re: What's the difference between Kobe and Vin? Are you
> >SERIOUS??
> >Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2003 15:13:34 -0300
> >
> >I don't personally believe that Kobe's case has any more to do with
> >basketball than OJ's had to do with football.
> >
> >Cecil
> >
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: Snoopy the Celtics Beagle <snoopy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >To: <Celtics@xxxxxxxx>
> >Sent: Monday, October 13, 2003 1:17 PM
> >Subject: Re: What's the difference between Kobe and Vin? Are you
SERIOUS??
> >
> >
> > > Maybe I'm naive, or perhaps just nostalgic, but I'd like to think
> >parents
> > > somewhere are still making an effort to exert a reasonable influence
> >over
> > > exactly how much info the kids get, lest they somehow DO end up "on
some
> > > porn site".
> > >
> > > And, to clarify, I realize that Kobe himself is basketball related.
The
> > > notion of whether he will play--or how well--is indeed relevant,
though
> >at
> > > this juncture, perhaps moreso to the Lakers than to the Celtics.  But
> > > chapter and verse on his accuser's physical condition?  Sorry, that's
> >not
> > > relevant in my view.  And if "All any kid has to do is look at a
> >newspaper
> > > and they'll get the same article," then why post it here?  We play LA
> >twice
> > > a year, unless both teams make the Finals.   How important is it to
the
> > > Celtics on a daily basis?
> > >
> > > At 10:05 AM 10/13/03 -0400, Shawn Niles wrote:
> > >
> > > >I hate to agree with Ray, but I see no problem posting the Kobe
> >articles.
> > > >This is a basketball related list, and Kobe's trial certainly has a
lot
> >to
> > > >do with basketball. As for the comment about the kids....  well you
> >better
> > > >block your kids from MSN, CNN, Boston.com, and any other news sites
> > > >because thats where the article came from. It is an AP released
> >article.
> > > >It's not like Ray went on some porn site and posted an article from
> >there.
> > > >Kobe's case is a NEWS story. All any kid has to do is look at a
> >newspaper
> > > >and they'll get the same article.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >>From: Snoopy the Celtics Beagle <snoopy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > >>To: Celtics@xxxxxxxx
> > > >>Subject: What's the difference between Kobe and Vin?  Are you
> >SERIOUS??
> > > >>Date: Sat, 11 Oct 2003 23:21:59 -0400
> > > >>
> > > >>At 04:26 PM 10/11/03 -0400, Dan Forant wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >>>Please explain the difference in Kobe's case compared to the AA
posts
> >we
> > > >>>went through with Baker??? Also guys list all the taboo subjects
you
> >don't
> > > >>>want discussed.
> > > >>
> > > >>In no particular order:
> > > >>
> > > >>Difference #1: Vin Baker plays for the Boston Celtics.  Kobe does
not.
> > > >>This is a Celtics-based list.
> > > >>
> > > >>Difference #2: This list discussed Baker's problem in context of
> >how--or
> > > >>if--he could continue to play for Boston, how the team treated his
> > > >>problem, and how he has played since entering rehab.  The discussion
> > > >>regarding the details what may (or may not) have happened between
Kobe
> > > >>and his accuser has, so far as I can tell, nothing whatsoever to do
> >with
> > > >>the Celtics, or basketball in general, except as a peripheral
comment
> >on
> > > >>the violent behavior of professional basketball players.  Even then,
> >this
> > > >>kind of detail is unwarranted, at least here.  I presume it might be
> >at
> > > >>least minimally more germaine to a Lakers-based list.
> > > >>
> > > >>Granted, some of the talk about alcoholism in general may have
> >wandered
> >a
> > > >>little far afield, but at least it still held strong relevance to
Vin
> > > >>Baker, and I personally found it informative.
> > > >>
> > > >>As was mentioned, there are probably kids who read this
list--though,
> >I
> > > >>would hope, with parental supervision.  While we can't pretend
they're
> >so
> > > >>naive as to think there are no bad people in the world, I think it's
> > > >>reasonable to at least not go chapter and verse into events that
> >really
> > > >>don't have a place here.
> > > >>
> > > >>For myself, I've never minded if the topic wanders a little
> >occasionally,
> > > >>but some things are just not appropriate, and I have to say that
post
> > > >>would be one of them.  I'm not timid myself.  As a writer, I've
> >written
> >a
> > > >>violent scene or two myself (though only for books specifically
geared
> > > >>away from kids).  We owe the kids our restraint in this venue, and
> >even
> > > >>our fellow adults.  Not everyone is strong of stomach.
> > > >>
> > > >>I think Dan seems to view this as a censorship (MY word, NOT his)
> > > >>issue.  I think it's more a matter of exercising good judgement,
which
> > > >>frankly, may not have happened.  Ray did realize he should have
posted
> >a
> > > >>warning header, which would have helped, and I give him credit for
> > > >>that.  But I think the wiser course would have been not to repost
the
> >article.
> > > >>
> > > >>The matter with Kobe is unprecedented in several ways, not least of
> >which
> > > >>is the availability of graphic detail that in years past never left
> >the
> > > >>courtroom.  Now such things are routinely included in books, movies,
> >and
> > > >>TV series.  And so, online as well.  I'm a proponent of the sharing
of
> > > >>information,but the question of the appropriate venue must be
> >considered
> > > >>before sharing it.
> > > >>
> > > >>I'm sure there are sites online that gather all the facts--and
> > > >>fiction--about Kobe's trial.  I personally think it might be better
> >for
> > > >>those interested to simply go there, or join the appropriate list,
> > > >>leaving it off this one.  Of course, as an old friend used to say
"Of
> > > >>COURSE that's "just my opinion"--do YOU see any stone tablets here?"
> > > >>
> > > >>It's just sad.  Two families lives will be destroyed no matter what
> > > >>happens.  Do we REALLY need to hear all the sordid details?
> > > >
> > > >_________________________________________________________________
> > > >Frustrated with dial-up? Get high-speed for as low as $29.95/month
> > > >(depending on the local service providers in your area).
> > > >https://broadband.msn.com
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Surf and talk on the phone at the same time with broadband Internet
access.
> Get high-speed for as low as $29.95/month (depending on the local service
> providers in your area).  https://broadband.msn.com