> He totally ignores the actual events that transpired and instead focuses on Sam's purported ideals, This argument about tone-deafness is kind of collectivist

> He totally ignores the actual events that transpired and instead focuses on Sam's purported ideals, This argument about tone-deafness is kind of collectivist rally against individual conversation. There is no need for everyone to focus on the same thing. One could even argue that overly focusing on the actual events is less productive (as for actual events there will be official investigation that should lead to more solid results). > but Aaronson seems to be taking an extremely strong stance in support of Sam by saying "the worst thing he did is he incorrectly weighted money" That just seems like misreading of the post, Scott explicitly wrote: "If SBF indeed gambled away his customers’ deposits and lied about it, then I condemn for it utterly".