Larry Ellison now on Tesla's board of directors
1–10 of 18 posts
Re: Larry Ellison now on Tesla's board of directors
#2Can we please update the link title to not exclude the woman of color?
Re: Larry Ellison now on Tesla's board of directors
#3Can we please update the link title to not exclude the woman of color?
Is excluding someone from being mentioned in the same sentence as LE a disservice?
Re: Larry Ellison now on Tesla's board of directors
#4Can we please update the link title to not exclude the woman of color?
Implying that op intentionally omitted wilson-thompson rather than highlighted the fact ellison is on the board
Re: Larry Ellison now on Tesla's board of directors
#5Can we please update the link title to not exclude the woman of color?
Is excluding someone from being mentioned in the same sentence as LE a disservice?
Given the title includes her, I'd like to know what the thought was behind removing her name. I'd be very surprised if it was; 'Larry is bad, so lets not harm people by association'.
Re: Larry Ellison now on Tesla's board of directors
#6Can we please update the link title to not exclude the woman of color?
An executive from a pharmacy chain joining Tesla is significantly less relevant to a tech community than one of the highest profile tech executives in history. Not everything is racist, which is what you seem to be implying by highlighting "woman of color".
Re: Larry Ellison now on Tesla's board of directors
#7Can we please update the link title to not exclude the woman of color?
Implying that op intentionally omitted wilson-thompson rather than highlighted the fact ellison is on the board
Implying that op intentionally omitted wilson-thompson
To point out that the edited headline no longer includes Kathleen Wilson-Thompson isn't accusatory. It's just a statement of fact. To "exclude" is but the opposite of "include."
Re: Larry Ellison now on Tesla's board of directors
#8Can we please update the link title to not exclude the woman of color?
Independent of the color of the person, OP has actually wanted to highlight that Larry Ellison is on board. OP wanted to highlight the tragedy.
Re: Larry Ellison now on Tesla's board of directors
#9Earlier quoted context omitted.
Implying that op intentionally omitted wilson-thompson rather than highlighted the fact ellison is on the board
Implying that op intentionally omitted wilson-thompson If you mean that the alleged "intent" of the OP is political, I don't see how the comment implies that. To point out that the edited headline no longer includes Kathleen Wilson-Thompson isn't accusatory. It's just a statement of fact. To "exclude" is but the opposite of "include."
> If you mean that the alleged "intent" of the OP is political, I don't see how the comment implies that.
It's pretty obviously the intent. They didn't use the very specific identity of her name, or the more general "other appointee" or any other simple generalization. They specifically pointed out "the woman of color", which pretty clearly shows their intent to be suggesting that she was excluded because of her race and sex. It's the difference between saying "John will be at dinner" and saying "A Muslim will be at dinner". It's intentionally highlighting part of their identity rather than just addressing the specific person.
Re: Larry Ellison now on Tesla's board of directors
#10Can we please update the link title to not exclude the woman of color?
An executive from a pharmacy chain joining Tesla is significantly less relevant to a tech community than one of the highest profile tech executives in history. Not everything is racist, which is what you seem to be implying by highlighting "woman of color".
Parent poster is calmly pointing out HN's long running title policy which is that submitters don't get to fuck about with the title unless it's misleading or clickbait.