> The reason is that Paul Graham stepped into the conversation, even if accidentally. Now that he’s done so, inaction can be perceived as a statement in itself.

> The reason is that Paul Graham stepped into the conversation, even if accidentally. Now that he’s done so, inaction can be perceived as a statement in itself. No, no, and no. Paul Graham does what he wants, when he wants, on his own time. Anything else is enslavement. Maybe now is a good opportunity for him to make a meaningful, impactful statement on sexism in tech. Maybe he will choose not to. You don't get to read anything into that.