Hacker News Reader

I do not disagree with you that the statement also named that as a reason for firing her.

All I’m saying that if the DDoS played any part in their decision to fire her, then that part of the justification for their decision represents immoral cowardice to me.

View on HN

named that? Which part? I think you're perceiving things that are not there.

I quoted the segment where I think the statement makes reference to the DDoS.

It is open to interpretation, but I don’t think it’s an unreasonable interpretation.

The bit you quoted makes no reference to the DDoS. You decided that the quoted text implied that. You then talk about interpretation, having claimed a specific reference that doesn't exist. You can't have it both ways.

The bit you quoted makes no reference to the DDoS. You decided that the quoted text implied that. You then talk about interpretation, having claimed a specific reference that doesn't exist.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com