[mwhuber]

I happen to merely be a hundred-aire, so take this FWIW, but I don't understand what Thiel being a billionaire matters. It seems natural for someone to want to use the power within their means to right a wrong (in their view). Not that I could relate, but I can imagine being outed would make me pretty spiteful as well - unsure what his wealth has to do with that.

[ganeumann]

It matters mainly because we have come to the point where you need to be very rich to pursue justice. If Gawker wronged you, as a hundredaire, you're just SOL.

I think much of the anger at Thiel is really misplaced anger at a justice system seemingly built with the goal of enriching lawyers. Government's one job is to provide justice: why should people have to rely on private funding for it?

[mwhuber]

Agree with the first part. I was mainly referring to why is it ok to out him because he's a billionaire - doesn't seem to be in the public's best interest, regardless of one's status.

Similar to the argument Gawker made about the tape - I don't want (or need) to see a HH sex tape any more than one of my neighbor.

[jessaustin]

Nothing I wrote indicated that it was, "ok to out him because he's a billionaire". TFA doesn't explicitly advance that proposition, but that's the subtext. Meanwhile, reasonable people would like to see some media entity that is not deferential to billionaires, with respect to important topics. So long as its only focus is the sexuality of semi-famous dudes, Gawker is not that entity.