There is a lot more to this issue than that.
The reactions outside and inside of the company showed very little tolerance, and between dialogue/engagement and intimidation/suppression, the latter was chosen. This in itself is a massive problem.
I read a lot of nonsense lately about this being "the free market", "he can defend whatever he wants but then face the consequences", etc. Do these people realise that the exact same arguments were used for the suppression of gays? how are these valid now? is this the kind of discourse people support in the Valley?
But even worse than that is the argument that nothing illegal was done. Yep, the same as stripping Alan Turing of his awards was legal at the time, or put him under "treatment", or marginalising and ostracising him.
Quit focusing in the legalese and look at the lack of compassion as human beings people have for those who dissent in a way that offends them.
The reactions outside and inside of the company showed very little tolerance, and between dialogue/engagement and intimidation/suppression, the latter was chosen. This in itself is a massive problem.
I read a lot of nonsense lately about this being "the free market", "he can defend whatever he wants but then face the consequences", etc. Do these people realise that the exact same arguments were used for the suppression of gays? how are these valid now? is this the kind of discourse people support in the Valley?
But even worse than that is the argument that nothing illegal was done. Yep, the same as stripping Alan Turing of his awards was legal at the time, or put him under "treatment", or marginalising and ostracising him.
Quit focusing in the legalese and look at the lack of compassion as human beings people have for those who dissent in a way that offends them.