"that article made his fellow employees look as if they were traitors to the forces of good."
I didn't read that into it. The original piece by Pierce simply made the case that it's unethical for Zynga to gain ownership of a game he made and marketed completely in his own time, and since they were inflexible on that point, the decision was relatively straightforward for him. He then went on to criticize the design of Zynga's products, to explain how that made his decision even easier. The implication that other former coworkers are compromising their character by joining Zynga is never made by Pierce; it's your own interpretation.
I didn't read that into it. The original piece by Pierce simply made the case that it's unethical for Zynga to gain ownership of a game he made and marketed completely in his own time, and since they were inflexible on that point, the decision was relatively straightforward for him. He then went on to criticize the design of Zynga's products, to explain how that made his decision even easier. The implication that other former coworkers are compromising their character by joining Zynga is never made by Pierce; it's your own interpretation.