I disagree that the rest is a distraction. It makes the article have a different point, but it is not an invalid one - there is a certain amount of elitism or c

I disagree that the rest is a distraction. It makes the article have a different point, but it is not an invalid one - there is a certain amount of elitism or classism (depending on your personal analytical bent) in statements about "Google chef syndrome". The fact that people find it acceptable to minimize a person's contribution based on job title or perceived place in workplace and social hierarchy, rather than actual contribution, is silly. The fact about rewarding the risk is a good supporting argument to the elitism point, and could be an essay of it's own sure, but again - a discussion about elitist attitudes isn't bad. One thing I find weird about all of this (tangential tho) - When this article first made the rounds, many people defending the derisive attitude of towards the chef ("he's just a cook, he doesn't deserve it" type arguments) also make the opposite argument in opposition to unions ("why base pay and benefits on seniority rules rather than on actual skill and hard work"). It's a cognitive dissonance I feel would be interesting to explore.