While I don't believe that thins are only fair when you have an exactly equal number of people on both sides contesting an issue, neither am I saying that the previous status quo was particularly healthy either. Again, just because the thought of this guy coming here worries me, does not mean I'm giving anyone who used to be here a free pass. Getting real fucking tired of hammering that nail...Stewie Plisken said:The fact that the people who were let go leaned toward one side of the political spectrum is part of the problem. A homogeneous staff has nothing to contribute to anything outside an echo-chamber. Even so, they were let go for economic reasons. That's the story we were given and considering how many people were let go and how many others were moved from other properties (mainly Gamefront) there is very little reason to believe it wasn't true. I'd wager Tito would cost more to keep than Morse, even if he weren't the EiC of the site-- though I obviously have no reason of knowing that.NinjaDeathSlap said:snip
So, why exactly is this move fishy? Should new hirings only be on one side of the political spectrum? Wasn't the fact that so many of the old contributors leaned on only one side a problem in and on itself? Hell, if they weren't all politically identical in the first place, would the firings raise any alarms to begin with?
Other than that, it's fishy because of my main point. The point I made very clearly in the previous post. The point I've made about a dozen fucking times now throughout the thread, including in the OP itself. The point, that you don't tend to announce an 'apolitical' direction, right before hiring a figure who is known exclusively for his politics. It cannot be that hard to see what's wrong with this picture! I don't know how much more plainly you'd like me to say it.