Why do you say he's a transphobic bigot?

Possibly because he is one. You could Google "mullenweg" and "transphobia" together for more details, dear troll account created 3 minutes before commenting.

I did Google it. So perhaps you can explain how these three tweets from Matt are evidence of him being a "transphobic bigot", as others are claiming:

1.

> When will you be honest with your followers? That the repeated adult content violations were not pictures like this, but likely ones on your other accounts (actual names): irishbigcockgiri, burgerfootjob, furryvore-burps, bredstrogen, cumburp, doggirlballsack, hungqueen, bigtittycockgf, bigcocktittygf, girltaint, muskmommy, girlballsack, showersharts, sapiosexual-breeder, catgirlhairball, catgirlcondom, catgirlcumsock, catgirlballsack, cumspangler.

2.

> These photos are fine for Tumblr. Someone else could post them. You can't because you violated the community guidelines and terms of service multiple times and are banned for life. With your new accounts on other services, consider not posting deathwishes against their staff.

3.

> Reporting credible threats of violence or terrorism is actually a legal requirement. No one reported your "i hope photomatt dies forever a painful death", however.

> There's no problem with your transition photos, or the millions of others that have been posted.

That last tweet in particular is evidence against the claim, is it not?

The first tweet is precisely why any honest person would conclude he's transphobic: those were private accounts and he abused his power as CEO to get that information. He publicly outed her out of pure transphobic spite, presumably hoping that Twitter's merry bands of transphobes would dogpile her there and everywhere else they could find her. (I also heard that he repeatedly misgendered her in a now-deleted Tumblr post, but I couldn't find a screenshot.)

"You can't proooove that he's transphobic, and you can't prooooove that he outed her because he wanted transphobes to harass her" yeah well we're not in court, this is a social matter. I am an individual human who has to make low-information judgments about other members of my species, and my low-information judgment of Mullenweg is that he's a transphobe. It is impossible for me to see an honest argument to the contrary. I am aware that dishonest arguments come quite easily:

- "innocent before proven guilty!"

- "what about the tweet where he said 'trans people are okay I guess'"

- "that was 8 months ago, when he was a wee 40-year-old lad, he's grown since then"

But considering Mullenweg is a horrifically bad person in many other areas of his life, I am quite confident he also sucks when it comes to civil rights.

As you most likely know, the context of that first tweet was Matt correcting disinformation about Tumblr moderation that was being spread on Twitter by that user. There's no indication that in doing so, Matt was acting on transphobic intent nor that he is any sort of bigot. Nor is there any evidence of the purported misgendering that has apparently been cranked out of the rumor mill.

It's quite funny that you doubled down with a feels over reals argument though. Just shows that deep down, you know you're throwing around spurious allegations.

the quote in question was not coming from the journalist that "bashed out some text" tho but from a team member. Thanks anyway for lashing out at the profession in general coz who do they think they are, right. Gotta know your limits, right?

Could you please stop posting in the flamewar style to HN? You've unfortunately been doing it a lot, on multiple topics. It's not what this site is for, and destroys what it is for, and we've already asked you to stop.

If you wouldn't mind reviewing https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and taking the intended spirit of the site more to heart, we'd be grateful.

However you feel about her wording in this case, Kara Swisher is definitely a journalist, not a “journalist.”

She wrote this in a casual post on Threads [1], not an article. There’s no attempt to “sensationalize for clicks” here. Journalists don’t have to be in journalist mode all the time when they’re communicating casually.

You seem to have a rather large chip on your shoulder.

[1]: https://www.threads.net/@karaswisher/post/DEniSxyS01i

Mullenweg brought this on himself. Swisher is just reporting on it. A rush to judgement can be an issue, but that is definitely not the case here.

She said what everyone has been saying for weeks. The wording is also clearly her opinion, nothing hidden there. She also included Mullenweg's post so everyone can read the source.

Are you saying that journalists can never share an opinion? Also, are you trying to argue Mullenweg is only looking bad because of journalists? His own actions and words seem to be doing a pretty good job on their own.

Your comparison between humans and machines is revealing. If you want a soulless computer to tell you what’s going on in the world, talk to Grok or something. Humans have personalities.

People can be multiple things at once as mind blowing as that may seem. They can act in public as a journalist and at the same time have private opinions that they share on social media.

Just as programmers not only “design schedule or plan radio or television programs”, journalism is not just “journaling”

> he's the bigger man (relatively speaking) by engaging in artful trolling

No, being immature does not make you “the bigger man.”

> Honestly, Matt gets my kudos if for no other reason because he's the bigger man (relatively speaking) by engaging in artful trolling instead of plainly undressed insults.

That is a pretty plainly terrible mindset, but one that I don't think is very uncommon.

OK so now I feel it's rather immaterial who of us was right and who was wrong

Looks like you're right!