Honestly, as someone reading this with no personal knowledge of the situation and so any evidence is ‘internet hearsay’ I say:
The post by the author in question isn’t worth this interest or drama. (Debating principles is good but this is clearly too personal for some.)
It coins a catchy phrase but the concepts of different people having to conform to different standards is not new. (the “bad man” has sent a representation of the human visual spectrum to a physics journal and called it a rainbow.)
“one rule for one and one for another” and many other adages through the ages sums up the idea.
Honestly, as someone reading this with no personal knowledge of the situation and so any evidence is ‘internet hearsay’ I say:
The post by the author in question isn’t worth this interest or drama. (Debating principles is good but this is clearly too personal for some.)
It coins a catchy phrase but the concepts of different people having to conform to different standards is not new. (the “bad man” has sent a representation of the human visual spectrum to a physics journal and called it a rainbow.)
“one rule for one and one for another” and many other adages through the ages sums up the idea.