[cookiecaper]

I think boycotts should be used sparingly and that people should first consider whether the deeds were sufficiently problematic to justify the potential cultural ramifications that arise when we choose to punish someone for having different beliefs or opinions than us, no matter how much we may or may not dislike them. It'd be preferable if we based our boycotts on more significant matters.

However, I think the much larger problem than boycotts from random groups (which are unlikely to be effective long-term) are the steps taken to purge Sterling entirely and divest him of his property.