[mustacheemperor]

>I wish you had done this impartially for both parties

instead of your thought experiment, I'd request you just pose your impartial take on the most charitable view for Steve and explain why in that view it was a reasonable act of good leadership for him to make these comments. Otherwise I don't think we're really talking about the same thing.

You've quoted the transcript elsewhere for people to "decide for themselves" and I'm not sure how you could be convinced we all did in fact read it and already did, and just don't agree with you.

[DecayingOrganic]

Well, I don't agree with myself too anymore! I stand correct, and I apologize for the confusion I created with my poor argument. I need to read more carefully.

[mustacheemperor]

Hey, for what it's worth I think it was valuable to take a critical look at the situation and where the real wrongdoing vs internet outrage snowball lies. And I think with this outcome I've experienced a civil and rewarding discussion of alternating viewpoints that is delightfully un-reddit!