While it may seem like semantics, I think discussing the issues raised by the post is more or less discussing the post.
I would go so far as to say that explicitly discarding the context of the post as many are doing is rude and ironically lacking in empathy. How can we say that the issues raised by something are worth discussing while simultaneously putting down the post?
Because we only have a single perspective on what actually happened in this instance. That perspective is selective and is motivated to tell the story a particular way. It might be right, but we do not have enough facts to know. So it's hard to know what the facts we can actually draw conclusions from. This makes a discussion of issues difficult because more time is spent on the identities of the participants rather than the actual underlying issues. It descends into being merely about GitHub vs. Coraline.
I would go so far as to say that explicitly discarding the context of the post as many are doing is rude and ironically lacking in empathy. How can we say that the issues raised by something are worth discussing while simultaneously putting down the post?