That really echoes the response by Ellen Pao herself in the New York Times article [1]:
> But Ms. Pao says that the most virulent detractors on the site are a vocal minority, and that most of Reddit users were not interested in what unfolded over the past 48 hours.
That may be true as the "lurkers" main interest is to consume the information made available by voluntary work of the contributors and moderators) and they, of course, don't benefit in the short term from the blackout.
But it is important to remember that this "vocal minority" is the part of the audience that contribute the most to the success of the site, and they > do it for free.
And, being charitable and assuming that the demands of these volunteers are valid, the shut down was a minor inconvenience to the passive audience but one that can bring change and improvement in the long term.
> But Ms. Pao says that the most virulent detractors on the site are a vocal minority, and that most of Reddit users were not interested in what unfolded over the past 48 hours.
That may be true as the "lurkers" main interest is to consume the information made available by voluntary work of the contributors and moderators) and they, of course, don't benefit in the short term from the blackout.
But it is important to remember that this "vocal minority" is the part of the audience that contribute the most to the success of the site, and they > do it for free.
And, being charitable and assuming that the demands of these volunteers are valid, the shut down was a minor inconvenience to the passive audience but one that can bring change and improvement in the long term.
[1] http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/04/technology/reddit-moderato...