MackJ

I don't have a reading comprehension problem, but you have a problem skewing this argument into a very narrow and ignorant lens. In fact, you're just about as bad as it as MackJ is. I don't think "group 1" brought rape/murder threats upon themselves, nor do I think that it's even remotely acceptable on any level. I've already stated this many times, and you would know it if you uh...had better reading comprehension. So what group do I fit in then? Maybe a 4th group! Or maybe stop grouping individuals just because its convenient for you, and you can't handle the fact that MAYBE THE PEOPLE WHO DISAGREE WITH YOU AREN'T ALL EVIL JACKASSES WHO THREATEN TO RAPE AND MURDER...OR FEEL THAT THOSE ACTIONS ARE JUSTIFIED. Perhaps life isn't so binary and not everyone feels the need to fit in your neat little groups. Or I suppose you can continue to be dismissive of people because it's easier than realizing that not everyone agrees with you, and not all of those people are out of their god damn minds.

Also, what was the purpose of asking for proof when all you did was tack on a third, almost equally narrow option that was one big unreasonable stance? It's the typed equivalent of verbally quoting somebody in a dumb or obnoxious voice as to convince whoever you're relaying, that what they said is wrong. It's skews and the conversation in order to bias your own position instead of using reasoning to strengthen your argument. Another easy way out.

That might be the biggest straw-man I've ever seen. Like stay-puft marshmallowman size.

I think you misunderstand the situation. It's not two groups. It's three, or hell probably more like 4.

1.) People saying Giant Bomb is staffed (almost?) exclusively by white men and that is indicative of a lack of diveristy of race/gender/sexual orientation/ect. (sorry but your race/gender/ect. do not dictate your opinions)

2.) People who feel giant bomb should hire whoever is best qualified and fits the best personality-wise (which is what giantbomb did) regardless of gender/race/ect.

3.) People who got bitter and angry and made hostile remarks about giantbomb and made terrible accusations of the staff and community unprompted on twitter.

4.) People who got extremely defensive, hostile and angry at group 3 and sent them horrible messages and threats and such.

Groups 1 & 2 are completely reasonable for the most part, they may disagree but thats fine they're allowed to. Most of the discussion (that hasn't been modded away) in the various threads here on giantbomb are made by these two groups, theres nothing wrong with that. Lumping groups 1 and 3 together and groups 2 and 4 together just makes everyone seem like assholes when thats not the case.

Saying "you disagree with me, you're part of the problem you should leave!" is not helpful to anyone and only stirs more hostility. Demonizing one side of the argument isn't helping either.

Groups 3 and 4 suck. Groups 1 and 2 are for the most part reasonable with different opinions and perspectives.