4 ms·

Anyone care to comment on why they downvoted? I'm genuinely open to the fact that I could be missing information here...

• danpalmer 10y ago
  Is the blog post by Susan not evidence? It certainly seems reasonable enough evidence to suggest what the investor is suggesting, which is that a more thorough and unbiased investigation should be carried out.
  • finkin1 10y ago
    I would consider Susan's blog post a form of evidence, but just about the lowest form there is. I don't know Susan personally, so I can't speak to her character. Maybe she's a pathological liar or maybe she's the most honest and genuine person I'll ever meet. The point is that I don't know, and unless you know her personally neither do you. This is not a controversial fact I hope we all agree. Forms of evidence I'd be interested in seeing: slack chats, emails, internal HR files, etc. that should all in theory come to light if there was an independent investigation. If there is a systematic covering up of sexual harassment at Uber there will be hard evidence to support it, right? What actual evidence (other than Susan's blog post) do we have that leads to a rational and unbiased conclusion that Uber is intentionally covering up sexual harassment?
    • the_common_man 10y ago
      I will tell you what you are missing. Look up the term 'witch hunt' and Uber is the target. Like you, I disagree how HN is reacting to this. All we have seen is a blog post making a claim and now everyone is a knight in shining armor.
      • finkin1 10y ago
        I'm not so sure you will tell me what I'm missing. An investigation conducted by an independent third party is going to tell me what's missing. Maybe a 'witch hunt' as you call it is a completely necessary and appropriate reaction to the evidence. The fact that Eric Holder has an interest in the success of Uber is a legitimate problem and something we should all be outraged by and attempt to change. It seems like you may have failed to comprehend the point I was making, but from the other side of the spectrum, which is pretty interesting. My point is that no one knows the truth until we have the evidence. Until then, all we can rationally advocate for is a process that uncovers the evidence in an unbiased manner. The author of the letter seem to be making many conclusions without the support of public evidence. Maybe the author knows certain facts we don't.
    • danielweber 10y ago
      She made accusations that specific incidents happened. In general, someone who makes a specific accusation that can be disproven if not true probably isn't making it up. I know we can all recall specific times when this hasn't been true. But as a general rule it works, as long as we remember we are still in the "judgment" phase and not the "punishment" phase.
      • DannyBee 10y ago
        "In general, someone who makes a specific accusation that can be disproven if not true probably isn't making it up. " On what do you base this? Honestly, i'd say that in court, the percent time people (be they cops, witnesses, you name it) make specific accusations that can be disproven, and are making it up, is in the 20-30% range, at least. These are on a witness stand, too. I'm just going by those things objectively disproven later (IE literally could not have occurred as the person says. Not "can't tell what really happened, video too fuzzy"). Outside of court situations with repercussions, i'd expect the number to be much higher not much lower. "I know we can all recall specific times when this hasn't been true. But as a general rule it works, " This is handwaving. Really. This is "well, you might think it's wrong, but i'm telling you it's not with no data to back me up". There's a reason "eyewitness testimony" has it's credibility judged by a jury, is not taken as fact, and is pretty much the lowest form of evidence there is: it's because it's the most often wrong.
  • dmitrygr 10y ago
    <devil's adviocate> A blog entry is not evidence. It is a claim. </
    • danpalmer 10y ago
      It is victim/eyewitness testimony, that's definitely evidence (although not conclusive obviously), and given the ease with which the specificity of these claims could be disproven, its easily enough to warrant the sort of investigation that the investors are asking for.
      • dmitrygr 10y ago
        I am all for an investigation. Don't get me wrong. I am just being pedantic :)
  • lefstathiou 10y ago
    The point being made by the parent is that Susan's post is as much hearsay as Travis is defending the culture. Ie potential bias goes both ways
• hrxn 10y ago
  Just the slow and steady decline of HN.. Facts don't count anymore.