The (intelligent) public can also WITHHOLD opinion when they have INSUFFICIENT INFORMATION to form a REASONABLE opinion. They can also realize that if an agreement not to discuss matters in public is being adhered to then any party respecting said agreement would NOT beable to say anything. Even in their own defense if they chose to follow the orthodox version of the verbal agreement. You see how this requires intelligence on YOUR part? You are exactly the type of "unintelligent public" I am speaking about.
Still I don't think it was moral in any way, freedom of speech or not, to call the man a cheater with zero proof behind it. They trash talked him enough, no one complained about that but when they took it too far they were threatened to be sued for it because they had no proof behind their accusations. No one is abusing anyone's freedom here but when it goes far, and this one clearly did, they WERE threatened to be sued for it and the court wouldn't disregard them either and tell him to go off because this is a free nation. They try to tarnish the man's reputation and career with all the insane hard work behind it in this sport, which I hope you know about, of course they will bite and bite hard. They didn't say anything about the other trash talking and were prepared to fight because that trash talking is good to promote the fight. But when they **** on the man's career just randomly like that then there's a legal violation and I'm sure everyone will agree. It's like I randomly walk to you and tell you that your mother had an abortion even though I know nothing about it but still live in your mother's neighborhood. What would you do about it?, tell me it's a free nation and I'm entitled to an opinion?. That's vocal violation and abuse. Yet if I come and say your mother is a ***** and use trash talk you would just laugh about it knowing that we might be competing over something.
can we also add to those memories when he "retired" the last time for two years while the Welterweight division was teaming with potential?
Pacquiao ducked Mayweather? Why all these drug test demands from the family of criminals, drug addict, wife beater. Mayweather does not deserve to fight the honorable man on and off the ring like Manny Pacquiao. Mayweather is the biggest coward in the midst of land of the brave. He belongs to a nice little ZOO where his kind roam around freely.
... you mean like the people claiming Pac is on PEDs when they lack sufficient proof? Yeah nice try there, but name a single celebrity that wouldn't immediately send someone to speak up when their reputation is being tarnished... go for it. Also you keep talking about some gag order... but you can talk about something without divulging information. People do it all the time. A sign of intelligence is logic... something that you should maybe use before calling people names...
Slander is slander. You aren't allowed to make false accusations against another human being especially if it hurts their means to making a living. If you state something you don't know to be true as a fact, you are liable for slander and defamation of character. Free speech does not protect the right to say anything you want any time you want.
you could definitely add that.....i too was pissed that he didnt take on Cotto after his victory over Shane a few years back. The thing is, i really think floyd would beat pac, rather easily as well, but unfortunately he's not as confident in his skills as I am. Maybe if ellerbe pushed him to take the fight, he would.
You do realize that responding publically to every statement made by the people on the other side of the negotiating table is not always the smartest strategy, don't you?
Who called him a cheater? Who? You are making a whole dramatic sob story over... peripheral participants. Laugh at you? As an adult I wouldn't care because I know my mother is in menopause? LMAO. What am I supposed to "go off" over something that I know isn't true? I am a grown a$$ man. This is the level of cognitive skill of a Pac fan? Let me help you with this. A GIGANTIC case is available and there are two law firms that can git it. Yours is one of them. The other law firm is a bit more successful than yours, but not by much. They are greedy and want the whole case. So they say, "Scar doesn't even have a law degree and didn't pass the bar." Now you could get all "high-society-dignified" and tell the plaintiff, "You see I tried cases before. If you don't believe I am credentialed then forget it." Or you could show your credentials and get that money. As a grown man? I would get that money.
Sure... maybe not to EVERY statement... but he hasn't responded period... which is a very odd strategy.
No it isn't. My opinion on this matter is neutral. I don't know what is in the contract so I don't care. On the subject of Pac being a cheat? I feel as though I have more than enough circumstantial evidence to feel comfortable saying he is. I present it regularly. You Pac fans can never defend it. Learn the meaning of the word irony.
So what is the standard of what you do/don't respond to? :huh Before long you would be... negotiating in public!
WTF? You have as much information of Pac being on PEDs as we do about this contract.... which is no information. No one really knows why Pac refused the blood tests the same way no one really knows why Floyd is refusing to talk. Guess you're part of the "unintelligent public" after all.
And considering the amount of misinformation in the public square and it's impact during the last negotiations AND the agreement of BOTH parties going into these discussions to limit 'negotiating through the media', that seems to be the appropriate strategy.