[smrtinsert]

Just because a media outlet might have been aggressively attacked his memo, doesn't mean his arguments are valid. He cherry picked various pieces and came to conclusions that weren't causal. At the end of the day, his perception of what is happening at Google is just that, perception.

My guess is that he will be settled with to avoid the annoyance or simply destroyed in court.

[weberc2]

> Just because a media outlet might have been aggressively attacked his memo, doesn't mean his arguments are valid.

Many media outlets aggressively attacked his memo, but the argument isn't "his arguments are validated because outlets attacked his memo"; it's that the response to his memo was malicious and slanderous, and this is wrong even if his arguments are bad. Bad arguments should be met with good arguments, not hate and slander.