It was posted to an internal group dealing with diversity. I find it fascinating that people who think they are refuting critics here always start with distorti

It was posted to an internal group dealing with diversity. I find it fascinating that people who think they are refuting critics here always start with distortions. And calling it a "manifesto" is just getting high on mob supply. So in a way, you're doing what is described in the article: > She didn’t wrestle with any of the evidence behind Damore’s memo. She just wrote his views “advanced incorrect assumptions about gender.” This is ideology obliterating reason. Just lie and close the case, as if that said anything about the case and nothing about you. Someone mentioned that this had already been posted and flagged. I responded to that but couldn't because this one was flagged for a moment, too. Yesterday, this had 156 and 101 comments points after 4 hours, and had been sunk like a brick to place 46 on page two: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14986507 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14986507 As I said before, this is the main hard data about this so far, distortions and censorship are cut from the same cloth. It reminds me a bit of the Appelbaum thing, that was a very shameful display as well. And I was right in my predictions then, sadly -- if you allow this sociopathy while paying lip service to be against sociopathy today in context of someone who might actually have done some bad things, tomorrow it will be completely innocent people. This is where we are at now, and all you're doing is proving it further.