English is not my first language, but I can understand a phrase simple like this:
It is possible that Samsung requested that logos be covered, but it is not an official IOC request and athletes will not be penalized for using or displaying non-Samsung phones.
For me IT IS POSSIBLE THAT SAMSUNG REQUESTED imply that, well, it's possible that happened ....
And I can see someone defending Samsung here .... not for the first time
how the bloody heck in your mind do you equate someone repeating IOC's decisions and rule 40, as supporting samsung?
what is it with you. if you don't agree 100% with Apple, you're a hater and a samsung fan?
is it possible, in any remote way for you to understand that some of us, are completely platform and company agnostic. We dont care whose logo is on our devices, as long as those devices fit our needs, Works well, and offers some form of solution to our wants and needs.
its entirely possible for people to like Samsung and Apple. Having owned products from both Apple and Samsung, as well as numerous other device manufacturers,
I can boldly say, i would rather deal with legitimate, intelligent debate and discussion with proper references, than someones non objective opinion showing absolutely favouritism despite evidence.
I've read very few posts in this thread, and the last thread, where people were outright saying samsung has every right to block the use of all iPhones. the only thing is, In all of this, Technically due to the rules of the IOC, the IOC is within their rights to enforce that no non-sponsoring devices are showcased.
IOC has enforced this rule many times for other sponsored items, as I mentioned in the last thread a few times, the IOC regularly enforces in Hockey that all non sponsored logos are completely covered. Including references to players own teams, cities and organizational alliances. NHL goalies playing in the IOC have to have stickers on their masks to cover identifying logos that are not sponssored.
that is all. That doesn't make someone a Samsung supporter. All that does is make someone who can actually read the posts and the rules and understand them.
Now don't get me wrong, you're entitled to be apposed to Rule 40. I think it's a little too much of a rule that is unnecessary, and I do agree that the IOC isn't some innocent organization that isn't influenced by greed and corruption. There are too many prior histories and even cases of the IOC being extremely corrupt.
But in this particular case? There's nothing corrupt thats really been mentioned. IOC has Rule 40. Samsung is a paying sponsor and is protected by Rule 40.
thats all there is too it. if Apple wants the same treatment, They can sponsor. if HTC wants the same treatment they can also sponsor. heck, if you want that treatment, you can spoonsor too.