I think the attitude of your comment is what he is dissenting against. Why should we ignore the fact that prominent people in our community have committed suicide? Why should people who bring it up have to deal with anger?

My take on this blog entry is that the writer wants constructive dialogue. I'm personally fine with that. Suicide is a touchy subject and I understand some people aren't comfortable discussing it. But I think your accusations against the author are unreasonable.

Why do you take this article so personally? I feel like your comment is way overblown. My personal impression is that this person felt affected by what happened and that this blog post is one way of expressing that. I think it's natural when someone dies this way for someone who feels that loss to question why it happened. I certainly felt that way about Aaron Swartz and I didn't know him at all. That's all I see here and I have a hard time understanding why you are so offended.

I think you're missing the point, that perhaps we need to examine the culture we're creating. The benefit of discussing the matter is that we may be able to prevent future tragedies from occurring if we find thing we can do differently to relieve the pressure of being a founder.

The author seems completely certain of the cause of death -- it certainly isn't presented as speculation.

By his own admission, he had only had "dozens" of emails with Jody over a few years and wasn't a close friend. Given Jody's family and close friends haven't spoken on this topic, I still consider the internet pontification of someone with only a sparse email-based connection to Jody to be speculation since he presents absolutely no evidence to support his allegations nor is there any corroboration from those with a confirmed connection to Jody.

It was confirmed earlier this week by a news station local to his area, Jody used a gun.

http://www.lvrj.com/business/jody-sherman-ecomom-founder-and... -- "The Clark County Office of the Coroner/Medical Examiner confirmed that Sherman, Ecomom's chairman and CEO, died early Monday morning. It was ruled a suicide."

Even if that is true, it doesn't change the fact that when the person's own family and friends are not discussing this matter, it doesn't behoove a stranger (more or less) blogging about it. It just strikes me as being in bad taste.

I think you have really, really missed the point of the OP.

First of all, what family and friends want is not the sole factor in what should be publicly discussed. If I die because I am drunk behind the wheel tomorrow, I bet none of my loved ones would want to focus on that aspect of my passing, and yet I think a case could be made that it is a legitimate topic of public concern.

Of course what Jody did was a private decision...and yet that is the problem the OP is alluding to. From all reports, Jody was a wonderful engaging person with a lot to live for. And yet he killed himself? If there is something about the tech world that causes such wonderful people to be untreated and lost, then is is a topic that should be considered publicly, and not hushed on the grounds of "bad taste"

I don't want to speak ill of the dead, but I knew Jody, and while he had many terrific qualities, he was not a saint. He had issues. And his biggest problem (at least when I knew him) was his unwillingness to admit he had a problem. It's all but impossible to help someone who won't help themselves.

When a prominent member of the startup community commits suicide I think it is clearly in the public interest for the leading media voices in the startup community to discuss how this is impacted by the culture o that startup community. I am afraid I'm not understanding the beef here.