I don't think Kickstarter's response to this incident is incorrect. We're talking about the legitimacy of a single blog post vetoing 686 backers (according to

I don't think Kickstarter's response to this incident is incorrect. We're talking about the legitimacy of a single blog post vetoing 686 backers (according to the cached link on the kickstarter post) from what it looks like from the kickstarter post. I don't think that this response was particularly measured: -1) Does it only take a single blog post to have kickstarter ban a project? 1a) Can we be certain that the blog post did not take the passage out of context? 1b) Can they be sure that the seduction manual was intentionally promoting the alleged "sexual violence"? 1c) Was there any reasonable attempt to communicate with the author to address the paragraphs in issue? -2) What number of the kickstarter community reacting negatively to this project? 2a) Was "Sexual violence" the only controversial topic? 2b) Was a specific (kickstarter) clause for violation cited? 2c) Was any law broken because of this project? 3)Can malicious intent be proven? [1] If you actually look at the link to reddit comment link I don't even see conversation that could be taken as people taking this as "sexual violence" and there is even one comment from a female user (derina585) that recommends changing the language and offering advice. This reaction to lynch mob the guy is unwarrented and is somehow legitimized by kickstarter's "apology." I think that we need to take a closer look at the information before jumping to conclusions here.