I don't think this person is complaining about the title being offensive, just grammatically confusing.
If you don't recognize who he is it's hard to tell whether the title is saying that he's "a hustler and a founder" or "the founder of Hustler".
If you don't recognize who he is it's hard to tell whether the title is saying that he's "a hustler and a founder" or "the founder of Hustler".
I disagree, it says "Hustler founder". Replace "Hustler" with <anycompany> and you have many a title on HN any day of the week that is "<anycompany> founder...." with no confusion.
The parent to my post said "The word Hustler being the first word of the sentence is unfortunate.". I'm guessing this is because of the nature and business of the company, i.e. hardcore porn, not due to a grammatical misunderstanding.
You're so intent on being offended by imagined offence taken by someone else that you're ignoring them telling you first hand that you've misunderstood them. The irony is astounding...
Oh jesus, the classic "no you're offended" weak defence. I am in a round-about-way pointing out how historically illiterate (younger) people are these days. Especially when, particularly on HN, free software, free speech etc is the de rigueur cause, yet somehow they don't even know the major recent Supreme Court cases that enforce and uphold the right to such things as satire. Hustler was a major case up there with Roe vs Wade. Now if I'm slightly annoyed by that, then so be it.
When I misunderstand titles and then realize my mistake I don't start complaining about it.
Can it be read either way? Yes. Does it really matter? No. Language is often ambiguous without context.
But even with that, it really isn't confusing. The ones who don't know who Larry Flint are may choose not to click on it whether they take the word Hustler as a verb or a noun. And the ones who do click will be disabused of their potential confusion almost immediately.
IOW, it's a huge nothingburger.