Thanks for clarifying your statement. Imho it's worth reading through both sides of the case with an open mind. I believe the only sensible conclusion is that a

Thanks for clarifying your statement. Imho it's worth reading through both sides of the case with an open mind. I believe the only sensible conclusion is that at least one side is lying very unashamedly. So on one side you have a multitude of people at Github, including presumably lawyers, HR people, founders, etc. On the other side, you have one person who has allegedly been wronged. We can't know which side is lying, so I won't suggest which one is lying, though obviously I have my opinion on the matter. I will however state where that opinion comes from: I know from reading about Github's culture that it is a very open culture, which seems to show a deep respect for individuals. Creating this sort of culture doesn't happen by accident. It takes a lot of consistent work over a period of years (I know that because I'm trying to create that sort of culture in my company, and it's not easy at all - there are countless reasons to abort and build a standard, closed culture). To me, what is being alleged by the accusing party is not congruent with the kind of character that would build an open culture. Obviously you're free to have the opposite opinion, and I respect your right to form your opinion on this matter based on your own beliefs, preconceptions, etc, just as I base my own opinions on my own beliefs and preconceptions. I think it's important that this respect is mutual, though, and that we both realise we're talking about opinions here, not facts.