Airbnb Host Who Canceled Reservation Using Racist Comment Must Pay $5,000

^ Seriously, they should have at least ordered her to pass the class too.

Also fucking sucks that Tammy made that Trump comment. As a registered Republican in this lunatic state, it just adds more noise to otherwise intellectual discussions on policy.
 
Last edited:
SPARTAN VI said:
Glad to see justice served to this racist prick. As an Asian\Caucasian Californian from the same area, I'd be beyond livid if my Asian wife and I got that same treatment.

That said, nothing Dyne did warranted a racist backlash like that... If I'm reading the transcripts correctly, she didn't surprise Tammy with 2 additional guests.. the two guests were known/agreed to well in advance. However I would be really frustrated as a host if she kept springing changes on me (e.g. pressing the issue of the dog, then adding ANOTHER dog). Originally the first dog was denied (the Yorkie) and she played the "well your ad said 'considered'" card, and kept pushing the issue after the host decided "no dogs." Well yeah, the host considered it, and said NO. That would have annoyed me at least... Somehow the host relented and agreed to the dog, then Dyne springs a SECOND dog weeks later? Again annoying, but doesn't deserve the racist reaction of course.
Click to expand...

I started to question if it was a violation of the fair housing act if it wasn't the reason for the cancellation but she did pretty much indicate that she would never rent them a room in the future because they are Asian, so even if the cancellation was justified, I think the comment is still actionable.
 
tybert7 said:
They should leave it at the fine, having to take asian american studies course will just generate more resentment. wtf are they thinking with those requirements?
Click to expand...

So learning about other cultures inherently creates resentment? That might be true of a actual racist. Which I'm guessing in the case here. Better to let people simmer in their own hate I guess.
 
Bandalo said:
I think the Airbnb owner has power over others, in choosing to rent or not rent her property. Since she (according to her text anyway) made this decision based on race, then it's textbook racism.
Click to expand...

Power as in rules or laws that favor a race over another, making a choice based on preconceived ideas is prejudice. Airbnb does not have rules that favor one over the other. She also knew she was Asian before hand and ONLY canceled when she texted her last minute about the two extra guests and pets. Her reason for canceling was because she broke the contract, to assume other wise is to ignore all the facts.

SPARTAN VI said:
That's the opposite in my experience. My Asian family (most of which are immigrants) keep our living areas immaculate, rented or otherwise. It's burned into our routine to remove our shoes regardless of the dwelling, to never let dishes sit, and basically not leave a slug trail of where you've been. In fact, it was totally foreign to them that we live with our dog inside the home... dogs are filthy and belong outside, to them. Granted my Asian family tends to cook the stinkiest food known, I wouldn't hold it against you if you didn't want to be in that room during/after they cook. That's not to say my Caucasian family and friends are slobs, they're just not nearly as regimented.

Background: my mother is Thai and my father is Caucasian. My mother and her family moved here in the 70s, but my father and his family are naturally born Americans going back several generations.
Click to expand...

Living or long term housing is not the same as short term in how it is treated, Asians also being very thrifty (also a preconceived idea) for long term will want to get deposits back, in most hotels and the like, cleaning fees are already included, outside of outright property damage. Area they come from also matters a great deal, as I said, this is a prejudice people hold, and like all prejudice it is not always the case.
 
BlueFireIce said:
For those asking about the comment, who have not dealt with a lot of Asians, what she meant is that they are VERY demanding and often show up with things or requests never agreed to. As people who stay in hotels or any rental, Asians can actually be some of THE WORST, mostly if they are not natural Americans as the social set in many of their countries are that you do not clean a place when leaving, and that being messy is totally acceptable. Back in my teens I had a job cleaning resort cabins and NO ONE wanted the cabin that an Asian group was in, I also know people right now that do airbnb and one that has a full time bnb, they all agree on this point.

Not excusing the cancel just explaining the (probable) reason behind the comment, with that said however, when adding two people and pets, you don't just ask once about it and move on, and only bring it up again as you get getting to the location, you get that set before hand, everyone knows this. Which makes it look more like a setup or something that is common with Asians, that being last second or showing up with things not agreed to in hopes of saving money, making her comment, while maybe inappropriate, quite accurate.

Also, something should be clear, that is prejudice (or maybe bigotry), NOT racism. Not everything is racist and people need to learn that. She canceled because they broke the terms agreed to without ever confirming the changes. Her comment was about the very common prejudice idea of how Asians are, racism requires power, mostly in rules favoring one over the other, mostly with the idea ones own race is superior, which is not the case here.
Click to expand...

Lmao, maybe you need to go to one of these classes too because if you have not heard, Asians are not on trial here.
 
modi123 said:
.. but wait, there's more!

In addition to paying monetary damages and taking a college-level course in Asian American studies, Barker must agree to comply with anti-discrimination laws, make a personal apology to Suh, participate in a community education panel and volunteer with a civil rights organization.
Click to expand...

Sounds like cruel an unusual punishment, this needs to be appealed :meh:
 
heatlesssun said:
So learning about other cultures inherently creates resentment? That might be true of a actual racist. Which I'm guessing in the case here. Better to let people simmer in their own hate I guess.
Click to expand...
Being forced to do anything causes resentment (in some cases).
For most normal/sane people, being forced to take a SJW course will get them pissed.
 
thesmokingman said:
They read like your prejudices and justification.
Click to expand...

They are (I even said so).

However everyone has prejudices, yourself included as you made assumptions AND suggested punishment based on them. Prejudices however are how we interact with people, they are assumptions, which everyone makes from the moment we meet someone, based on looks, mannerism, race, age etc etc. Mine come from first hand dealings however and not just wild ideas. Prejudices are not bad, they can lead to bad actions, but on their own are just how we view people or groups of people and how we decide to interact with them, which can actually make that interaction smoother.

Her actions were based on breaking contract. Her comments were based on prejudice.
 
BlueFireIce said:
They are.

However everyone has prejudices, yourself included as you made assumptions AND suggested punishment based on them. Prejudices however are how we interact with people, they are assumptions, which everyone makes from the moment we meet someone, based on looks, mannerism, race, age etc etc. Mine come from first hand dealings however and not just wild ideas. Prejudices are not bad, they can lead to bad actions, but on their own are just how we view people or groups of people and how we decide to interact with them, which can actually make that interaction smoother.

Her actions were based on breaking contract. Her comments were based on prejudice.
Click to expand...

What assumptions and suggested punishment did I make before we go down this hole you are heading?
 
BlueFireIce said:
That I was putting Asians on trial and that I should be punished in the form of being forced to take the same class the lady here has.
Click to expand...

Lmao, we're talking about the story not you, what assumptions did I make? Regarding you, yea you do throw your prejudices around and sort of justify the actions in the story. This isn't about Asians and how smelly you think they are, or how much of a pain in the ass you think they are. I'll give you a clue, PEOPLE in general are a pain in the ass, smelly, and difficult. The fact that you single out Asians in this case just shows that about you.
 
Hypergreatthing said:
I didn't read too much into the ruling or whatever, but is that what the court said or what she agreed to in a plea bargain?
Click to expand...

There was no court, she went before this board
BlueFireIce said:
Power as in rules or laws that favor a race over another, making a choice based on preconceived ideas is prejudice. Airbnb does not have rules that favor one over the other. She also knew she was Asian before hand and ONLY canceled when she texted her last minute about the two extra guests and pets. Her reason for canceling was because she broke the contract, to assume other wise is to ignore all the facts.
Click to expand...

To assume otherwise is to ignore the statement from Ms. Barker, who directly texted "I wouldn’t rent it to u if u were the last person on earth” and “One word says it all. Asian”. If she hadn't texted that last bit, she'd be perfectly within her rights.

Clearly SHE knew she was being a racist POS as well, since she caved in to the housing office and never took it to court.
 
BlueFireIce said:
Living or long term housing is not the same as short term in how it is treated, Asians also being very thrifty (also a preconceived idea) for long term will want to get deposits back, in most hotels and the like, cleaning fees are already included, outside of outright property damage. Area they come from also matters a great deal, as I said, this is a prejudice people hold, and like all prejudice it is not always the case.
Click to expand...

Short term rental, long term rental, permanent housing, whatever it doesn't matter. We have a deeply ingrained need to not live in squalor and obviously it's a net gain for everyone to return a property in its original condition. Of course I can't objectively argue that your observations are false, but the premise that Asians are more predisposed to trash a place because we're Asian is just at complete odds with my personal experience being Asian and living among Asians.
 
Last edited:
thesmokingman said:
Lmao, we're talking about the story not you, what assumptions did I make? Regarding you, yea you do throw your prejudices around and sort of justify the actions in the story. This isn't about Asians and how smelly you think they are, or how much of a pain in the ass you think they are. I'll give you a clue, PEOPLE in general are a pain in the ass, smelly, and difficult. The fact that you single out Asians in this case just shows that about you.
Click to expand...

I was talking about the story, you chose to try and make it about me...So now you are saying its not about me? What?

As for the story, I pointed out to those who were asking why she would make the comment and what it meant, so I explained how most people who have dealt with services like this view people, you might not like that, but it also doesn't make it racism. You also seem to be confused, I stated in my post that this IS prejudice and explained why people have it, I also replied to your post where you quoted me stating as much. I also explained it depends on area people are from, as well as the person, as prejudices are not always correct, but trying to ignore social norms and the very real differences in social behavior from given areas and people doesn't do anyone any favors.

I also said nothing about other people or how others can be a "pain in the ass", as this story is not about other people, and she didn't make a comment saying "white people" or "black people", so why I would cover them I am not sure.

Bandalo said:
There was no court, she went before this board


To assume otherwise is to ignore the statement from Ms. Barker, who directly texted "I wouldn’t rent it to u if u were the last person on earth” and “One word says it all. Asian”. If she hadn't texted that last bit, she'd be perfectly within her rights.

Clearly SHE knew she was being a racist POS as well, since she caved in to the housing office and never took it to court.
Click to expand...

That is not racism, that is prejudice, or bigotry at best.

She knew she was Asian from the start, now, had she seen the booking and msged her and said "i don't book to Asians", that would be closer to racism.

If you read the texts it becomes clear what her "asian" comment means, as the text before and after frame it, like most things in a language. Right after that msg she said "Want something for nothing", which refers back to my first post explaining what she meant by the comment in relation to the prejudices most people have about Asians.

I also never said the comments were ok, or right, I explained what she meant by them to those in this thread who were didn't know what it meant or why she said it.
 
SPARTAN VI said:
Short term rental, long term rental, permanent housing, whatever it doesn't matter. We have a deeply ingrained need to not live in squalor and of course it's a net gain for everyone to return a property in its original condition. Of course I can't objectively argue that your observations are false, but the premise that Asians are more predisposed to trash a place because we're Asian is just complete odds with my personal experience being Asian and living among Asians.
Click to expand...

I never said they go out of their way to trash something, only that the tend to not clean anything, leave dishes around etc etc. The reason for this is that most tend to want to get everything they can for a deal/price. And being short term matters, as cleaning is often included in the price, so they feel they can leave the place however, with stuff every where and dirty because they "paid" for it. Again, that does not mean they get something dirty for the hell of it, but if they DO in their normal process, mostly on the last day or two, they do not clean it or pick up. in the cases for longer (week or two) stays where we cleaned more than just at check out, the places were well kept, but nothing like that on check out. This has to do with getting their moneys worth, and has nothing to do with your personal family, again, as I have said in every single post now, these are prejudices people hold, and like all prejudices do not apply to everyone. Yet again, this was explaining what and why the "Asian" comment meant.
 
Cmdrmonkey said:
lol they're basically sending her to reeducation camp for "wrongthink"

latest
Click to expand...

in 1984 there were re-education centers.

it seems it was a manual after all.
 
BlueFireIce said:
Her reason for canceling was because she broke the contract, to assume other wise is to ignore all the facts.
Click to expand...

All the facts? Does that include the facts that the California DFEH fined Tami Barker $5,000 and Barker's own lawyer said she was "regretful for her impetuous actions"? Because canceling on account of Suh breaking the contract doesn't sound like an "impetuous action" to me.
 
BlueFireIce said:
That is not racism, that is prejudice, or bigotry at best.

She knew she was Asian from the start, now, had she seen the booking and msged her and said "i don't book to Asians", that would be closer to racism.

If you read the texts it becomes clear what her "asian" comment means, as the text before and after frame it, like most things in a language. Right after that msg she said "Want something for nothing", which refers back to my first post explaining what she meant by the comment in relation to the prejudices most people have about Asians.

I also never said the comments were ok, or right, I explained what she meant by them to those in this thread who were didn't know what it meant or why she said it.
Click to expand...

Not to be a dick, but a race-based prejudice is literally the definition of racism from the dictionary. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/racism You may not agree, but Merriam-Webster lays it out.

If she had kept her prejudice to herself and limited her texts to the facts at hand, she'd have gotten off without a problem. Since she CHOSE to bring race into the argument, she got herself into this mess.

It's perfectly legal to be a racist asswipe. It's not legal to bring your racism to work.
 
Bandalo said:
There was no court, she went before this board
To assume otherwise is to ignore the statement from Ms. Barker, who directly texted "I wouldn’t rent it to u if u were the last person on earth” and “One word says it all. Asian”. If she hadn't texted that last bit, she'd be perfectly within her rights.
Clearly SHE knew she was being a racist POS as well, since she caved in to the housing office and never took it to court.
Click to expand...

This is a general comment :
You guys, do realise that you are making assumptions based on fragments of a text, right? Here is what we know about the text: "I wouldn’t rent it to u if u were the last person on earth” and “One word says it all. Asian”.
Do you realise what this "and" means? That there is more text that we don't know the content of it. You are all making assumptions & judgement based on fragments from a text !!

(* P.S. On the other hand, i (we) can comment on the verdict which seems complete: "She must also agree to comply with anti-discrimination laws, make a personal apology, participate in a community education panel, and volunteer with a civil rights organization.". And as i already said at #6 the words must & volunteer contradict with each other. So in my opinion, this is a very hypocritic statement. )
 
We need a counter for posts that defend racist remarks and another for posts that included racist, bigoted remarks. Oh and a SJW counter. It's not a bout a white male, so you know that golden oldie has to come out.
 
BlueFireIce said:
I never said they go out of their way to trash something, only that the tend to not clean anything, leave dishes around etc etc. The reason for this is that most tend to want to get everything they can for a deal/price. And being short term matters, as cleaning is often included in the price, so they feel they can leave the place however, with stuff every where and dirty because they "paid" for it. Again, that does not mean they get something dirty for the hell of it, but if they DO in their normal process, mostly on the last day or two, they do not clean it or pick up. in the cases for longer (week or two) stays where we cleaned more than just at check out, the places were well kept, but nothing like that on check out. This has to do with getting their moneys worth, and has nothing to do with your personal family, again, as I have said in every single post now, these are prejudices people hold, and like all prejudices do not apply to everyone. Yet again, this was explaining what and why the "Asian" comment meant.
Click to expand...

I get'cha. I'm just amazed that anybody holds this prejudice or that there's any sampling of Asians that would remotely fill it. It's an utterly alien concept to me... "Asians are poor drivers," is one that even I maintain to be true as it's confirmed before my eyes daily. I'm completely unaware of a preconception that Asians are more likely to leave a mess when it's not in their financial best interest to clean up after themselves. I don't blame you for your observation, but I must stress there are more significant and unacknoweldged factors at work there.

If I were to apply context to Tammy's racist comment, I'd assume she was referring to the stinky food we eat or the smelly incense and stuff we burn/spray.
 
Sith'ari said:
This is a general comment :
You guys, do realise that you are making assumptions based on fragments of a text, right? Here is what we know about the text: "I wouldn’t rent it to u if u were the last person on earth” and “One word says it all. Asian”.
Do you realise what this "and" means? That there is more text that we don't know the content of it. You are all making assumptions & judgement based on fragments from a text !!

(* P.S. On the other hand, i (we) can comment on the verdict which seems complete: "She must also agree to comply with anti-discrimination laws, make a personal apology, participate in a community education panel, and volunteer with a civil rights organization.". And as i already said at #6 the words must & volunteer contradict with each other. So in my opinion, this is a very hypocritic statement. )
Click to expand...

Yeah, it's a good thing we're not a court and just discussing what material is available...

What IS true is that Ms. Barker and her lawyer clearly either are terrible at negotiations, or they knew the other side had an air-tight case and would hand them their asses if this went to court. Otherwise why would they agree to the huge fine AND all this other crap?

Using "volunteer" in this context is pretty common, similar to court-ordered community service. The courts will track it as "community service", but the place you're serving will call it "volunteer work".
 
For this specific case, there seems to be too much info being left out to come to an entirely fair and unbiased conclusion. The facts are: 1) The customer was Asian 2) She had guests and pets with her, 3) The cancellation made by the host was done last minute and 4) The host said some racist things.

Was the guest wrong for bringing guests / pets that were not agreed upon? Maybe - but we don't have the facts to say that did happen or not happen with certainty. However, it is fact that the host said some racist things. So IMO the host should have been punished in some way, shape or form. If the facts about the guest were / are true, the host should have just cancelled her reservation (without saying anything stupid) and maybe given her bad feedback explaining the details of why (that's an AirBnB thing too right?).

The thing that disappoints me in this thread, though, is how some have taken the case as an excuse to start Asian-bashing, because Surprise! Asians come in as many varieties as white or black or latino people do. You have the average, generally conservative Asians and you have the assholes (some may be rich and some may be poor). I won't deny there are Asian bumpkins who are bad guests, but I'd wager there are whites or blacks or latinos that are equally as bad and FYI the term "Asian" can cover Middle-eastern, Indians, Chinese, Japanese and everything in between.
 
Sith'ari said:
This is a general comment :
You guys, do realise that you are making assumptions based on fragments of a text, right? Here is what we know about the text: "I wouldn’t rent it to u if u were the last person on earth” and “One word says it all. Asian”.
Do you realise what this "and" means? That there is more text that we don't know the content of it. You are all making assumptions & judgement based on fragments from a text !!

(* P.S. On the other hand, i (we) can comment on the verdict which seems complete: "She must also agree to comply with anti-discrimination laws, make a personal apology, participate in a community education panel, and volunteer with a civil rights organization.". And as i already said at #6 the words must & volunteer contradict with each other. So in my opinion, this is a very hypocritic statement. )
Click to expand...

I'm "making assumptions" based on

  1. the fact that the California DFEH fined Tami Barker $5,000.
  2. the fact that Tami Barker's own lawyer has said, quote, his client is "regretful for her impetuous actions."

Just ask yourself this. If you were in her shoes and you think you did nothing against the law or nothing wrong, would you tell your lawyer to tell the press, "my client is regretful for his impetuous actions"? Would you?
 
Sith'ari said:
This is a general comment :
You guys, do realise that you are making assumptions based on fragments of a text, right? Here is what we know about the text: "I wouldn’t rent it to u if u were the last person on earth” and “One word says it all. Asian”.
Do you realise what this "and" means? That there is more text that we don't know the content of it. You are all making assumptions & judgement based on fragments from a text !!

(* P.S. On the other hand, i (we) can comment on the verdict which seems complete: "She must also agree to comply with anti-discrimination laws, make a personal apology, participate in a community education panel, and volunteer with a civil rights organization.". And as i already said at #6 the words must & volunteer contradict with each other. So in my opinion, this is a very hypocritic statement. )
Click to expand...
As written perhaps, but they could have said and become a volunteer at civil rights organization and it'd be correct, since a volunteer is a person who does work without getting paid to do it.
 
Bandalo said:
Yeah, it's a good thing we're not a court and just discussing what material is available...
What IS true is that Ms. Barker and her lawyer clearly either are terrible at negotiations, or they knew the other side had an air-tight case and would hand them their asses if this went to court. Otherwise why would they agree to the huge fine AND all this other crap?
Using "volunteer" in this context is pretty common, similar to court-ordered community service. The courts will track it as "community service", but the place you're serving will call it "volunteer work".
Click to expand...

1) I don't care what she & her lawyer said or not. I make conclusions on my own, and in this case there are only fragments from the text, so i simply can't make conclusions on my own in this case.
2) As i said , must & volunteer don't match with each other. I don't know how this contradictment is allowed in US courts, but no lawyer in my country (*Greece) would use such hypocritic terms. I can use logic by my own, and logic dictates that these 2 words are irrelevant with each other, and i need no judge to tell me that.

nilepez said:
As written perhaps, but they could have said and become a volunteer at civil rights organization and it'd be correct, since a volunteer is a person who does work without getting paid to do it.
Click to expand...

volunteer is someone that makes something based on his own free will, without being forced.
 
Sith'ari said:
1) I don't care what she & her lawyer said or not. I make conclusions on my own, and in this case there are only fragments from the text, so i simply can't make conclusions on my own in this case.
Click to expand...

Wait, so you don't care what Tami Barker or her lawyer said, but you apparently do care that

Sith'ari said:
there is more text that we don't know the content of it. You are all making assumptions & judgement based on fragments from a text !!
Click to expand...

ie. you care that we don't know what else Tami Barker said. Huh.

Also, you apparently don't care that a state agency fined Tami Barker $5,000 and her lawyer went on record as saying his client's action was "impetuous," but at the same time, you can't get over that

i (we) can comment on the verdict which seems complete: "She must also agree to comply with anti-discrimination laws, make a personal apology, participate in a community education panel, and volunteer with a civil rights organization.". And as i already said at #6 the words must & volunteer contradict with each other. So in my opinion, this is a very hypocritic statement. )
Click to expand...

Seriously, some of you people are letting your hatred of SJWs cloud your reasoning.
 
alexyang said:
All the facts? Does that include the facts that the California DFEH fined Tami Barker $5,000 and Barker's own lawyer said she was "regretful for her impetuous actions"? Because canceling on account of Suh breaking the contract doesn't sound like an "impetuous action" to me.
Click to expand...

Of course they did, it's Cali, and why would they turn down free money? The overall direction of government, no less Cali as far as what is called "racism" has grown due to general ignorance and lumping. Her lawyer is going to say whatever, and it was also in relation to the comment. Again, as I have said over and over and over and over again, I was explaining what she meant by it and in no way said it was ok or right. Please, for the love of god read.

Bandalo said:
Not to be a dick, but a race-based prejudice is literally the definition of racism from the dictionary. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/racism You may not agree, but Merriam-Webster lays it out.

If she had kept her prejudice to herself and limited her texts to the facts at hand, she'd have gotten off without a problem. Since she CHOSE to bring race into the argument, she got herself into this mess.

It's perfectly legal to be a racist asswipe. It's not legal to bring your racism to work.
Click to expand...

Racism in that sense requires power and a "superior" race, that does not exist here. Her comment was prejudice, her reason for canceling was not. The comment was in the way of "should have known", if you read the texts it's extra request after request, booked and then asked about adding two people, then asked about adding a dog even though she said no, but then agreed to it being ok but would cost more and she would send an invoice for it, it is clear she never paid that invoice or she would have the receipt of payment. She then texts her a month later and says we bought ANOTHER dog and want to bring it as well, the owner also reluctantly agrees to this. But she wanted two extra people and two dogs for only $50 more a night, which the owner told her no.....See where the Asian and "wanting something for nothing" comments came from now?

They then show up without paying this invoice, as she asks her in the text about the cost for the extra people and pets, which at this point the owner has had enough of this shit (i would have to) and cancels the booking.

It is obvious she could have handled it better and left the comments out, but her reason for canceling was not due to race.

SPARTAN VI said:
I get'cha. I'm just amazed that anybody holds this prejudice or that there's any sampling of Asians that would remotely fill it. It's an utterly alien concept to me... "Asians are poor drivers," is one that even I maintain to be true as it's confirmed before my eyes daily. I'm completely unaware of a preconception that Asians are more likely to leave a mess when it's not in their financial best interest to clean up after themselves. I don't blame you for your observation, but I must stress there are more significant and unacknoweldged factors at work there.

If I were to apply context to Tammy's racist comment, I'd assume she was referring to the stinky food we eat or the smelly incense and stuff we burn/spray.
Click to expand...

Close, but I still think you miss what I mean. Its not about financial impact to them, rather it's about getting their monies worth, this reason is also not mine, I have a number of Asian friends as I used to be into the JDM car area for a long time and lived close to China Town (80% of my friends were Asian at this point in my life), this topic came up due to my past work as a teen when in passing about one of our friends (French) who was VERY messy came up as one of the Asian guys was rooming with him, every single one of them said the same thing. It's a point that if they don't they feel they didn't get their value out of the deal and also that in some areas it is also believed to do this is an insult to the person who does the work as it's a point of pride to do ones work and do it well and you are robing them of this chance.
 
alexyang said:
Wait, so you don't care what Tami Barker or her lawyer said, but you apparently do care that

ie. you care that we don't know what else Tami Barker said. Huh.

Also, you apparently don't care that a state agency fined Tami Barker $5,000 and her lawyer went on record as saying his client's action was "impetuous," but at the same time, you can't get over that

Seriously, some of you people are letting your hatred of SJWs cloud your reasoning.
Click to expand...

Hmm, exactly what part from the : "1) I don't care what she & her lawyer said or not. I make conclusions on my own, and in this case there are only fragments from the text, so i simply can't make conclusions on my own in this case" have you not understand? I'll say it one more time. I make conclusions on my own. In this case, i don't have all the data in order to make conclusions on my own.
-So, according to your logic, the words "must" & "volunteer" match with each other? If yes, then.... fine by me !!:p
 
Sith'ari said:
1) I don't care what she & her lawyer said or not. I make conclusions on my own, and in this case there are only fragments from the text, so i simply can't make conclusions on my own in this case.
2) As i said , must & volunteer don't match with each other. I don't know how this contradictment is allowed in US courts, but no lawyer in my country (*Greece) would use such hypocritic terms. I can use logic by my own, and logic dictates that these 2 words are irrelevant with each other, and i need no judge to tell me that.



volunteer is someone that makes something based on his own free will, without being forced.
Click to expand...

Well, if you don't care what she or her lawyer said, then how can we even have a discussion? This entire argument is about what she said. You CAN draw some conclusions about the fact she was willing to agree to this settlement though. People don't agree to settle for huge fines and such if they're 100% innocent of all charges.

And "volunteer" is frequently used in this country to describe someone who is working without monetary compensation, regardless of their motivation.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top