UrPartnerInCrime@sh.itjust.works to Hockey@lemmy.ca · 1 year agoBlackhawks waive Corey Perry for 'unacceptable' conductwww.espn.comexternal-linkmessage-square13fedilinkarrow-up121arrow-down10
arrow-up121arrow-down1external-linkBlackhawks waive Corey Perry for 'unacceptable' conductwww.espn.comUrPartnerInCrime@sh.itjust.works to Hockey@lemmy.ca · 1 year agomessage-square13fedilink
minus-squarebaconisaveg@lemmy.calinkfedilinkarrow-up7·1 year agoWhy is it funny? If the union/lawyers/contracts are involved, there’s plenty of reasons not to blab to the press. This doesn’t seem like a “but the public has a right to know!” issue, so not sure why finding gossip disgusting would be funny.
minus-squarequicksand@lemm.eelinkfedilinkarrow-up3·1 year agoBecause they’re being intentionally vague in their responses. What else would you expect from people when you don’t answer their questions?
minus-squareLhianna@feddit.delinkfedilinkarrow-up5·1 year agoIt does involve one other person though and that person has a right to their privacy.
minus-squarebaconisaveg@lemmy.calinkfedilinkarrow-up2·1 year ago What else would you expect from people when you don’t answer their questions? “We fired Bob.” “Why?” “You’ll need to wait until we’re ready to release more information.” “That’s understandable. It doesn’t really concern me anyways, I was just being nosy.”
Why is it funny? If the union/lawyers/contracts are involved, there’s plenty of reasons not to blab to the press. This doesn’t seem like a “but the public has a right to know!” issue, so not sure why finding gossip disgusting would be funny.
Because they’re being intentionally vague in their responses. What else would you expect from people when you don’t answer their questions?
It does involve one other person though and that person has a right to their privacy.
“We fired Bob.”
“Why?”
“You’ll need to wait until we’re ready to release more information.”
“That’s understandable. It doesn’t really concern me anyways, I was just being nosy.”