4 ms·
Avoiding interaction with the state is understandable. However, the state is not the only option. Various types of arbitration could be used, for example. These
by pdkl95 10y ago
Avoiding interaction with the state is understandable. However, the state is not the only option. Various types of arbitration could be used, for example. These may not have the power to enforce criminal punishments like the state, but as you said, they already dismissed that option.
- VonGuard 10y agoWhat, like an independent third party? Cause that's what they did.
- Natsu 10y agoThere was also this, which didn't get very widely reported: http://www.twitlonger.com/show/n_1sop8ps http://www.twitlonger.com/show/n_1sop8ps I don't know what the truth is here, but I can't trust anyone who won't make the investigation public by that very fact. And just for the record, I have been severely sexually harassed, enough that the person responsible was fired. So it's not like I can't sympathize with victims of harassment. Yes, it really is uncomfortable facing them, but it's also the right thing to do. EDIT: Not clear why this is so controversial, but that doesn't beget trust, either. But it's true and I'll stand by it.
- robryk 10y agoIs it still an independent third party if they chose her and are paying her? This is normally enough to say that she has a conflict of interest.
- tedunangst 10y agoNormally an independent investigator is paid regardless of their findings, and future business with other clients is dependent on maintaining a reputation for impartiality.