Not so Fun fact: a second coworker, from the same company, different crime, has also been convicted and is serving 14 years. (Victim died when police shot the wrong person). His stack overflow account is still up.
[0]: https://stackoverflow.com/users/968075/gareth-pursehouse
ReiserFS retain its name when Hans Reiser is convinced of murder.
There is no reason to remove one's name or close their account when they are convicted of a crime.
Be honest, the coverage of your ex co-worker's crime was not comparable to Mangione's murder, was it?
I bet companies are getting uncomfortable with just how many of their users are supportive of murder, and how much it's going to increase TOS violations for incitement to violence. Do you think advertisers want their products next to threads fawning over a murderer and saying more need to be shot?
Sounds like society's problem, not SO.
Put it another way, how many people would be checking on Luigi's account On SO in this way without this streisand effect it caused by banning the feww dozen users up voting him? How many people before this even knew Luigi had a SO account? How many of his posts talk about justifying murder?
If denying "fame" was SO's goal, they failed tremendously.
> Do you think advertisers want their products next to threads fawning over a murderer and saying more need to be shot?
Find those threads before we start worrying what may happen retroactively. Luigi had a manifesto, but it's not like he pasted it all over the internet as some sort of deliberate plan to gain social media clout.
There are quite a few people legitimately named Adolf Hitler. We don't ban them for their assossiation to a more famous Adolf.
When Stack Overflow starts losing advertisers because they don't want their products appearing next to posts calling for CEOs to be murdered, it becomes their problem too.
You can barely answer questions correctly without getting them removed unless you're high rep. You think an off topic response will last more than 2 minutes?
While I personally disagree with copyright on principle, I'm not sure if you've fully considered the ramifications of your argument.
10 man-hours of work, at minimum wage, is about the price of a video game right now.
Your argument would mean piracy of video games is pretty much always right
The posters to SO give copyright to the company as per the TOS. No copyright violation is happening.
> You agree that any and all content, including without limitation any and all text, graphics, logos, tools, photographs, images, illustrations, software or source code, audio and video, animations, and product feedback (collectively, “Content”) that you provide to the public Network (collectively, “Subscriber Content”), is perpetually and irrevocably licensed to Stack Overflow on a worldwide, royalty-free, non-exclusive basis pursuant to Creative Commons licensing terms (CC BY-SA 4.0)
That requires named attribution, which SO violated, voiding the license.
You dont have to use passive language like our media.
Luigi, in the Mario bro's sense, goes through a lot of pipes. Perhaps I'll call it LuigiFS.