[dead]
We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11204520 and marked it off-topic.
She made herself a liability with her own inappropriate behavior. I'm not defending the chuckleheads she had a problem with, but I'm not holding her up as some sort of vigilante hero.
Oh good grief, not this again.
The ethicality/morality of a potential supplier is a legitimate consideration for many organisations, and in some cases is written into the organisation's policies.
For example, WWF procurement[1]:
> "We monitor and select goods and services carefully to avoid those that are harmful or damaging to both the user and the environment."
> "we require suppliers to complete an environmental and ethical questionnaire"
Whether you agree with the behaviour, disagree, or even don't care, it's a legitimate question to raise when talking about alternative suppliers.
[1] http://www.wwf.org.uk/about_wwf/other_publications/environme...
I'm absolutely for more ethical companies (though clearly there is a long road ahead), it's the specific example of Adria Richards, which often generates an endless series of venomous posts, that I object to.
Not to mention the way the case is summarized by parent is, let's say, highly debatable.
Yeah, we shouldn't mention bad company behavior on a thread about... bad company behavior.