It has been [0] days since the last report on nasty Meta shenanigans.

On a related note, I believe (based on no evidence) that Zuckerberg knows of a lot more nasty dealings and wants to crucify Wynn-Williams to scare off any potential whistleblowers.

▲

CoastalCoder 10 hours ago | parent [-]

Honest question:

If you have no evidence, then why do you believe it?

	▲	gherkinnn 10 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		Circumstantial plus expecting the worst. A company and founder with such an extensive list of publicly known misdeeds (starting with Facesmash), chances are that there are many skeletons left to uncover. Setting a precedent is no unknown course of action. It's not much to go by, but I am a commenter on HN, not a lawyer and Occam's razor doesn't disagree either.
	▲	watwut 10 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		Because it is extremely unlikely she knew everything. Based on her book, she was last to learn quite a lot of ugly stuff she reports on - they told her only when they had to. And she left long time ago. It is even more unlikely that the company magically became clean after her leaving.