3 ms·

Sooner or later you've gotta decide who to believe. The person with nothing to gain by reporting it, or the company with everything to gain by denying it. Besi

by moomin 9y ago

Sooner or later you've gotta decide who to believe. The person with nothing to gain by reporting it, or the company with everything to gain by denying it. Besides, it isn't hearsay, the allegations have been made by some of the victims. Hearsay is something else.

kbenson 9y ago
I didn't say it was hearsay. I didn't say I didn't believe the people reporting the problems. I'm just noting that there's a lot of room between "some employees were harassing others, largely unknown to most management" and "there's a pervasive culture of harassment that goes all the way to the top, and includes much of management". And I can fully believe everyone reporting problems believes they are right while withholding judgment as to whether their interpretation of their situations, which were generally highly emotional and formed during extreme stress, is entirely consistent with reality once the other side has a chance to state their case. We should always get both sides. Humans aren't very good at representing stressful situations with other humans objectively.
- optimuspaul 9y ago
  It's hard to maintain credibility when you say things like "I didn't say it was hearsay" when your words are just above and say "it's all a big swirling mess of hearsay at this point"
  - kbenson 9y ago
    Fair enough, that's a deserved criticism. I thought I had used slightly different wording, and didn't confirm before responding. What I was attempting to communicate is that there are a few first hand accounts, and numerous news articles and blogs expounding on what those mean. I didn't mean to imply that those that had those experiences were not referring to their own experiences, or that they were being untruthful, but I understand how either of those might have been interpretations of my words. I'll leave them as they are because I don't believe in whitewashing, and let this stand as the correction. While I think it's important to get both sides of the story, I don't view both sides with the same level of trust. I think those with the accusations are far more likely to have accounts closer to reality in this case, but closer to reality doesn't mean they are accurate representations of the situation when taken by themselves. Confirmation bias is real, and doesn't have to have such an extreme effect as to change someone's opinion to still have a large effect on how people perceive the situation.
Jach 9y ago
Not really. I can continue living completely agnostic of this drama, it's none of my concern, a belief either way pays no rent. If I wanted to work there, then I'd have to decide, but as a casual user there's no need. Downvoters: do you drink coke products?

by moomin 9y ago

kbenson 9y ago

I didn't say it was hearsay. I didn't say I didn't believe the people reporting the problems. I'm just noting that there's a lot of room between "some employees were harassing others, largely unknown to most management" and "there's a pervasive culture of harassment that goes all the way to the top, and includes much of management". And I can fully believe everyone reporting problems believes they are right while withholding judgment as to whether their interpretation of their situations, which were generally highly emotional and formed during extreme stress, is entirely consistent with reality once the other side has a chance to state their case. We should always get both sides. Humans aren't very good at representing stressful situations with other humans objectively.

optimuspaul 9y ago
It's hard to maintain credibility when you say things like "I didn't say it was hearsay" when your words are just above and say "it's all a big swirling mess of hearsay at this point"
- kbenson 9y ago
  Fair enough, that's a deserved criticism. I thought I had used slightly different wording, and didn't confirm before responding. What I was attempting to communicate is that there are a few first hand accounts, and numerous news articles and blogs expounding on what those mean. I didn't mean to imply that those that had those experiences were not referring to their own experiences, or that they were being untruthful, but I understand how either of those might have been interpretations of my words. I'll leave them as they are because I don't believe in whitewashing, and let this stand as the correction. While I think it's important to get both sides of the story, I don't view both sides with the same level of trust. I think those with the accusations are far more likely to have accounts closer to reality in this case, but closer to reality doesn't mean they are accurate representations of the situation when taken by themselves. Confirmation bias is real, and doesn't have to have such an extreme effect as to change someone's opinion to still have a large effect on how people perceive the situation.

Jach 9y ago

Not really. I can continue living completely agnostic of this drama, it's none of my concern, a belief either way pays no rent. If I wanted to work there, then I'd have to decide, but as a casual user there's no need. Downvoters: do you drink coke products?