Hacker News Reader

Comment by philistine | Hacker News Reader

I would refrain from using Louis CK as any sort of a moral compass. For obvious reasons.

He's arguably the greatest comedian of all time. I think there's definitely a thing or two to extract from his wisdom.

So should a person's mistakes be held against them for the rest of their life? Especially given what he did, which seemed very mild compared to the reaction.

I think OPs comment is accurate. He does lose his ability to be used as a moral compass. He might still be funny and have interesting insights but he is not a moral compass.

Hmm I heavily disagree. I think that just because someone did something fucked up in the past doesn't mean they can no longer be trusted or their moral compass/judgement is somehow permanently broken.

Perhaps this is the case for me because what he did wasn't really messed up from what I know about the story, just weird.

I will concede that in some situations, and from my perspective these would almost entire involve sexual assault, I'd consider a person unredeemable.

In a situation where someone has indeed done some fucked up stuff - they need to prove that their moral compass has been fixed in order for them to be trusted again. I don't think you get a pass because you've been quiet for a couple years. So I disagree with you.

You should probably go read up on what he did - pretty messed up power dynamics. (https://www.thecut.com/2018/08/what-about-the-careers-of-lou...)

Even a broken clock is right twice a day.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com