The bizarre thing about this post is that it attacks Patio11&#x27;s post which emphasized <i>consulting with a lawyer</i> (and <i>predicted</i> that the result of that consultation would be firing the biz dev guy for cause, but emphasized that the consultation was important), rather than any of the many comments that recommended the action that Patio11 <i>predicted</i> that a lawyer would recommend, without advising consulting with an expert in the applicable area first.<p>This is bizarre, because her objection does not seem to be with the idea of consulting with a relevant expert and being guided by their opinion, but with firing without doing so, which <i>isn&#x27;t what Patio11 recommended</i>. From other things in the post, its clear that the real issue is that the poster has a personal animus for Patio11 because of some ancient personal drama the two apparently had on HN in the past, and her perception that that interaction resulted in the eruption of negative treatment of her by others in the HN community. And, it really seems like she is mistargeting Patio11&#x27;s response as a pretext to resurrect drama over that and, simultaneously, make some vague implications about gender dynamics at HN based on Patio11 being a high-karma-rank male poster and her being a high-karma-rank female poster and the relation that has with the old drama.