alt Hacker News> No, he did not
Those were his words, I’m not sure why you’d expect your assertion to be more credible.
> nobody was claiming that Grayson reviewed Quinn's games beyond like a day or two of confusion
They spent a year lying about her “unethical” actions justifying all of the abuse, and it all traced back to that foundational lie.
> Those were his words
No, they aren't. They're your interpretation of Boston Magazine's spin (and it's really, really obvious purely from the style of the prose that it's a complete hit piece that chose its conclusion ahead of time). The article provides no evidence of any such words. Because there is no such evidence, because he said nothing of the sort.
> They spent a year lying about her “unethical” actions justifying all of the abuse
That is, again, objectively not what happened. Any claims WRT Quinn were evidenced, and were also irrelevant to the large majority of what was going on. (What was actually going on, not what sources like the ones you prefer chose to focus on.)