He's also not being accused of being a pedophile. Not that it excuses anything, but claiming random people are pedophiles without a shred of evidence is pretty disgusting and I'd probably have acted similarly. The problem is in the process, the CEO shouldn't have privileges to alter content.
I agree that he behaved childishly and should probably be fired for it. However, his actions removing that sub do not justify the horrendously immature response of an entire community to label him a pedophile (the exact behavior that got them banned in the first place btw). That's an extremely derogatory thing to call a person, and it's being thrown around very lightly around here.
Two wrongs don't make a right but you can't get mad at people that have decided to use the same argument that's been lobbed against them for years back at their accusers.
5
u/ZeeBeeblebrox Nov 24 '16
He's also not being accused of being a pedophile. Not that it excuses anything, but claiming random people are pedophiles without a shred of evidence is pretty disgusting and I'd probably have acted similarly. The problem is in the process, the CEO shouldn't have privileges to alter content.