>If he wanted an honest discussion he shouldn't be passing notes around like it's highschool. The memo apparently ended up being pass by more and more people. That's not how you approach this or many topics that are sensitive.

You are making the perfect the enemy of the good here. Your idea of "honest discussion" and claim that how not to approach topics that are sensitive is completely subjective. You are trying to silence his voice (just like google is silencing many chinese voices). You dont make the rules about how someone gets to speak.

I dont think he was productive in his desires but I do believe that he was candid , genuine and I would never tell someone they dont get to epxress their honest thoughts.

Think of the past decades with gay rights , trans rights and you want to tell someone they cant express their thoughts and need to keep their ideas in the closet. Is bigotry from the LGBTQ crowd allowed but we cant be bigoted against them? This double standard keeps us all back from making a truly free society. It seems google and and from your argument that this freedom is subjected and carefully tailored from elite that designate what voices should be heard and silenced.