3 ms·

As I've pointed out elsewhere: the original claim was "...[c]laims of harassment are easy to make". Are you voting that they are "easy"? Here is an anonymous h

As I've pointed out elsewhere: the original claim was "...[c]laims of harassment are easy to make". Are you voting that they are "easy"? Here is an anonymous hit-piece written about Horvath and posted on Medium: https://medium.com/@geeekcore1/facts-conveniently-withheld-d96f431f4e8e#.breg6euh7 https://medium.com/@geeekcore1/facts-conveniently-withheld-d... I'm not saying she was forever un-employable. But I am saying that like any other whistleblower in any other industry decrying her accusation as "easy" is an insult to what she went through. EDIT: Hell, there's a flagged comment on this branch that proves my point: "If someone pulled those kind of stunts on you, I think your sympathy over their career would be limited also."

tzs 11y ago
> As I've pointed out elsewhere: the original claim was "...[c]laims of harassment are easy to make". Are you voting that they are "easy"? I'm not "voting" on anything, nor even offering an opinion on that particular aspect of your discussion with the poster above you. You posed a specific question: "Since we're talking about GitHub specifically, how easy do you think it's been for Julie Ann Horvath to find a job?". I was curious enough to spend a few minutes looking at her LinkedIn and then a couple other public things of hers (a Medium article and her Twitter profile) to try to get an idea what the answer was to that one specific question from your comment.
- drhayes9 11y ago
  Sorry, I read it as an attack on the argument as a whole rather than a straight fact-check. I knew her employment situation when I wrote the comment and thought the factual citations were refutations instead of context. So yeah: I'm sorry I jumped down your throat for trying to add to the discussion.