Bold comment. Privately, I was disappointed that he was fine after reading the news; I suspect that you're not alone in your views based on that and I had a similar moral debate internally.
I'm proud of you for lending your username on HN to remind everybody how truly awful of a person he can be, but I fear that even your clout cannot save this comment from people that love him.
It has lead to people being hell-banned for inoffensive things, the worst I've seen is someone hell-banned because their double post got such a large amount of down-votes.
HN is owned privately and everyone's ability to use it is at pg's discretion. pg has no duty, implied or otherwise, to provide a platform on which the principles of free speech hold. This is not true of society at large. You seem to be conflating the two.
Nearly every website is owned privately. That doesn't mean we still shouldn't seek free speech as a moral goal. What if Google censored your Gmail messages? You're using it at their discretion, right?
I got an earful about him from other people both publicly and privately, and I also recall a thread right here on HN a while back where there were allegations of (and spirited discussion about) his interest in getting young men into his hotel room at conferences.
I’m definitely not criticizing anyone who wishes him well, wishes poorly of him, or just wishes he would step out of the limelight (there seem to be more than a few people who consider him an liability to the open source movement at the moment regardless of past contributions). I was just trying to stick my finger in the wind and ask other people how they feel, not suggest how people are supposed to feel.
Bringing up a comment he made on pedophilia and some vague allegations about him inviting young guys into his room is certainly sticking your finger somewhere.
But oh, right, other people said those things, not you. You're just reporting, in a comment thread about the man's uncertain physical health, asking if it's "acceptable" to wish him well.
True enough. I have less of a problem with him than I do those who consider him infallible. They're already at work in this thread; your comment was gray when I replied to it, and the same fate is befalling those who reply to you.
Let us be generous and consider the possibility that downvotes reflect the opinion that my question is off-topic in a thread about his health rather than agreement or disagreement.
I am downvoting you because I think it's repugnant to wish someone ill health because of what they said, especially if you're pretending you're being neutral/'fair' about it.
That it was said six years ago and you dredge it up in an entirely unrelated topic shows that you are more interested in grinding an axe than discussing the matter at hand.
I'm proud of you for lending your username on HN to remind everybody how truly awful of a person he can be, but I fear that even your clout cannot save this comment from people that love him.