I think part of this was also your classic case of tech industry misogyny, too. There has been a lot of thinly veiled sexism in the discussions about Helen and Tasha vs Sam.
Given how the board handled this whole situation like an amateur hour shit show, you will be hard pressed to argue their competence and qualifications in their favor.
Rather, you are doing exactly what you are claiming from others, you’re seeing two unqualified board members, who happen to be women, and defending them because they’re women even though this whole situation displayed the incompetence of the entire board, Helen and Tasha included. The only one taking a sexist position is you.
If the board handled this situation like competent adults who had ever spoken to an attorney, we wouldn’t all be having this conversation in the first place.
There’s absolutely nothing in my comment that even implies I’m defending them and their actions, and also absolutely nothing in my comment that implies any of my statement is based on their gender.
I seem to have struck a nerve with you, though. I think the commenter doth protest too much.
> There has been a lot of thinly veiled sexism
No, they didn't imply it, and they didn't claim it was the primary motivation. They just said it was a contributor. You are perceiving a stronger claim than they made.
They said what they said, trying to weasel out of it doesn't make the case.