>Why is that important? Seems to me the most important detail is how ideological blindness led an entire college to make false accusations against innocent people, and then double down when all facts came to light, to the point of losing $36M and all not apparently acknowledging that they were ever wrong. Isn't that weird? Isn't that really, freaking weird?? What does it imply about academics, society, racism, ideological capture?
Indeed. Reading the comments on the New York Times article linked to the other recent HN discussion of the case, there are—among many forthright condemnations of the Oberlin administrators and students that caused this catastrophe for the college—more than a few comments lamenting how the worst outcome of this is that "Trumpists" will gloat. Not that a bakery faced six years of litigation (in the legal and public spheres) against the college with the billion-dollar endowment that is the closest thing to "The Man" in their small town, but that the commenters' own ideological enemies might be pleased by the court case's outcome.
Indeed. Reading the comments on the New York Times article linked to the other recent HN discussion of the case, there are—among many forthright condemnations of the Oberlin administrators and students that caused this catastrophe for the college—more than a few comments lamenting how the worst outcome of this is that "Trumpists" will gloat. Not that a bakery faced six years of litigation (in the legal and public spheres) against the college with the billion-dollar endowment that is the closest thing to "The Man" in their small town, but that the commenters' own ideological enemies might be pleased by the court case's outcome.