Earlier quoted context omitted.
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…
Re: Larry Ellison now on Tesla's board of directors
#11It's one thing if iandanforth expresses concern about diversity, and something else if he accuses the OP of bigotry. I don't see an accusation. To say it's a shame to leave her out of the title, doesn't imply the OP left her out for nefarious reasons. Ellison is much more famous.