Your interpretation is the other way I read it. Either the pronoun people and the n-word people are the same people, or they are two different groups of opposi

Your interpretation is the other way I read it. Either the pronoun people and the n-word people are the same people, or they are two different groups of opposite upset people. Given your interpretation, is he saying "engaging troll arguments further is a form of disruption"? It's also possible the n-word people are prowokism but making a twisted not in bad faith argument that everybody saying the word is more inclusive. And meaning it earnestly. This reading seems the least likely. His more egregious transgression, to me, is going from "If nobody is ever offended, we either don't have enough diversity of thought or we don't have enough transparency in communication" to 'let's sever ties with our 20 most outraged, so there isnt so many offended here.' There's some contradiction between words and actions. If he wants to build a offense-inclusive environment, it needs to include all outrage. These 20 people should be encouraged to continue as an anti-culture team, as a counterfource and check & balance counter to their culture, albeit in a way that doesnt monopolize internal attention.