I can't quite grasp the message that you're trying to send here. Is this supposed to be a jab at 'the media?' Or is this supposed to be some sort of pro-mental-health message?
Doesn't it seem mean-spirited for a well known individual to jump to a conclusion in a public forum that a person suffers from mental illness due to their behavior, all descriptions of which likely only comes from blogs and newspapers?
And no, this is not a jab at the media. Not sure if you've ever been the subject of media coverage, but I can tell you from personal experience that it's enlightening to discover how little of reality is represented in the news. It's just a fact of life.
Doesn't it seem mean-spirited for a well known individual to jump to a conclusion in a public forum that a person suffers from mental illness due to their behavior, all descriptions of which likely only comes from blogs and newspapers?
Without knowing the person in question, what else is there to go off of beyond news and blogs? Seems to me he was stating his opinion based off those sources and I came to the same conclusion.
The limited information mostly points to a person under extreme duress and clearly offended by his management. How is it not a personal attack to conjecture in public about mental illness? Because it's apparently unintended as a personal attack? Hmmm, I'll just swing this club around in a crowded room, hope I don't accidentally hit someone.
In these circumstances questioning mental stability essentially questions a persons entire ability to reason and reasonably rationalize.
Is it that under duress and in a perfect storm of personality conflict, someone must be mentally ill to break down or behave in a way that appears irrational? I guess it could be, and damn, if someone doesn't agree with me, that's a pretty good sign too ;-)