So the lawyers who said they had "possession of information that would be helpful to their case" were misleading? Your whole rationalization seems very biased. He raised public awareness (including details of) of some wrongdoing he perceived at the company and was most likely going to testify about those wrongdoings, that qualifies as a whistleblower in my book.
> "possession of information that would be helpful to their case" were misleading?
I didn't say that, but helpful comes on a very large spectrum, and lawyers have other words for people who have information that is crucial to their case.
> that qualifies as a whistleblower in my book.
I'm not trying to downplay his contribution, I'm questioning the integrity of the title of TFA. You have only to skim this comment section to see how many people have jumped to the conclusion that Sam Altman must have wanted this guy dead.
