12-20-2016, 04:02 PM
(12-20-2016, 03:46 PM)TrumpCard link Wrote:Yeah, right. If this were about sexual assault or harassment, there would be no ban or any ban would have been issued 5 years ago. The recent events that led to the ban were a violation of a travel ban and a violation of the alcohol ban.Â
Except the alcohol ban and the travel ban were in place as a response to the complaints 4-5 years ago.
As a concept it is pretty easy to understand a course of events where a problem occurred; the group is told you must do X, Y and Z to fix this situation; a later review finds the group has made no real effort to follow through on X, Y, and Z; this brings on a harsher penalty. From everything I have heard, read, and heard from band friends I think this is how folks like Greg Boardman view the situation.
Of course being reasonable in concept and reasonable in reality are far different things. I think it is incumbent upon the band in their appeal to Etchemendy to emphasize that to some extent X, Y, and Z were unreasonable (they were), and more importantly that outside of some technical issues the band has pretty much fulfilled them anyway (it appears as if they did). And more important than the details of the suspension is that when the band comes back, it comes back as recognizably the LSJUMB.
