Earlier quoted context omitted.
> You think "the media" is intentionally causing confrontation as part of some collusion with Reddit to make money? GP isn't implying any collusion. The media is intentionally causing confrontation just fine on its own. > I saw racist and sexist posts personally Nobody is claiming the hateful stuff didn't exist. But painting "Reddit" as sexist while conveniently ignoring the 90-9-1 rule and focusing on Pao's gender i…
GP isn't implying any collusion. The media is intentionally causing confrontation just fine on its own. Do you have any evidence of this? atrocious track record Like what? That she shut down a forum called "Fat people hate", where posters singled out the obese for vicious, personal online harrassment? is... in bad taste, to say the least Do you even understand what that means? Criticising Reddit or its community is i…
You don't know me. You have no idea what my feelings are regarding FPH. Yet, you make assumptions.
So now we got that out of the way, hi, I'm Jerry, and I hated FPH and didn't give a rat's arse about its shutdown. Had Pao made only that one decision in her two years as CEO, reddit would have bigger problems on its hands.
Thankfully, I just wrote a reply to someone else's comment right below yours - a much nicer comment which asks a question without making aggressive assumptions - addressing your actual question. Take a look.
> Criticising Reddit or its community is in bad taste? Seriously?
The thing with rephrasing what someone else said and appending "Seriously?" is it always goes your way, because you get to decide how you rephrase it. Good thing again that I didn't say "Criticising Reddit or its community is in bad taste". I said:
> painting "Reddit" as sexist while conveniently ignoring the 90-9-1 rule and focusing on Pao's gender instead of atrocious track record [is in bad taste].
In other words, trying to turn millions of people into sexist pigs by ignoring how such communities function is in bad taste. Do you disagree?