Article doesn't explain anything definite about the whole kerfuffle regarding Sam's firing other than to provide elaborate innuendos that have little basis without official quotes from concerned parties.
Sure, there's still a lot of ambiguity. If you want to say "the only thing we definitely know right now is that the board was incapable," then I can agree with that. That doesn't mean there's not more to be learned and we need to dismiss new information. Obviously there's a distinction between the board being incapable of making good decisions or the board being incapable of effectuating good decisions, which is what everyone is keen to learn, and why people are interested in these articles.
