I'm suggesting that:

1. the rumor is, until verified, a rumor.

2. Basing a judgement about one's moral compass on a rumor about firing half the company (even if it's true) and blog post is a classic example of a Fundamental attribution error.

1) Was the staff fire or not. That would be pretty easy to check. You instead of saying this is a rumor would have made a better argument by actually checking then coming back and posting "yeah well actually it was exactly 40% that was fired not 50% like he mentioned".

2) see 1)

What's the rumor? That half the staff was fired or that Noah uses the particular M.O. that was presented?

Can't you easily verify either of these for us?