3 ms·

That's true, but we should also take into account how the nature of sexual harassment, and the often power imbalance between the harasser and victim, naturally

That's true, but we should also take into account how the nature of sexual harassment, and the often power imbalance between the harasser and victim, naturally provides the harasser with all the advantages. You are free to judge for yourself, but from the Information and Axios article, there does seem to be a preponderance of evidence to suggest Justin is either a serial sexual harasser/predator, at worst, or a totally inappropriate jerk-douchebag, at the very least. Both deserve condemnation. Bad actors need to be rooted out and ostracized, especially bad actor VCs.

handedness 9y ago
> the nature of sexual harassment, and the often power imbalance between the harasser and victim, naturally provides the harasser with all the advantages. That is correct in cases where harassment has occurred, yes. In cases of false accusation, though, the accuser has nearly all of the advantages. And it's not as if it never happens, either: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_accusation_of_rape#Estimates_of_prevalence https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_accusation_of_rape#Estim... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_allegation_of_child_sexual_abuse#Prevalence https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_allegation_of_child_sexu... Which is why due process is important both legally, and culturally. While I understand how people directly impacted by the event (and their loved ones) have neither the inclination nor the capacity to withhold judgement, mob-like indignation on the part of the public about every story which is reported is a dynamic that hasn't served us well thus far, and the situation isn't showing any signs of improving.
- ebola1717 9y ago
  Your links say we can believe these allegations with 90-98% confidence. Actually, multiply that by 6 women, and that's 99.9999% confidence, assuming the low end of that. My request services only have to have a 99.9% success rate.
  - thethirdone 9y ago
    That's assuming that the false accusations are statistically independent. I would expect false accusations to be more common in cases with more accusers.
  - handedness 9y ago
    I didn't provide that to indicate a confidence level in the guilt of the accused, but to say that the reason we have due process is because serious allegations should be treated seriously, and the comments section of a tech 'blog isn't the place to act as judge, jury, or executioner. Else we're little better than places that hold mock trials and summary executions.
- ithinkinstereo 9y ago
  I see your points about false accusations, but how many false accusations cases involve multiple accusers spanning back years?
  - handedness 9y ago
    I don't know, nor do I need to. That's the point. Serious accusations need to be tried in a manner that involves evidence, sworn testimony, counsel, etc., precisely because of their seriousness. In the meantime, online conjecture by parties with no standing should probably presume innocence until guilt is found, because a mob mentality should be beneath us. I know someone who was falsely accused of something serious–decades in prison type stuff–and the news coverage alone destroyed his business and put his family through hell. Anyone who's opposed to capital punishment because it prevents the accused from ever finding justice should also be concerned about the effects the court of public opinion can have on someone's life, and err on the side of withholding judgement when, again, there's no reason for us to judge this person unless we have direct dealings with the individual and need to make our own estimations out of self-interest. What's happening in this thread isn't about self-interest, it's about self-satisfaction. That's neither useful nor wise.
    - ithinkinstereo 9y ago
      > What's happening in this thread isn't about self-interest, it's about self-satisfaction. That's neither useful nor wise. You're making a reasonable, but I would argue, pedantic argument (as it applies to this situation). Caldbeck is not being tried in a court of law, but in the court of public opinion. The standards are looser, that's just a part of living in a community with others, there is a natural bit of self-policing. It's part of our instinctual nature as humans; we pattern-match, it can get us in trouble at times, but it's gotten us this far as a species. If he is innocent he is free to defend himself and provide counter-evidence. He is being rightfully pilloried given the many claims, over a long period of time, against him. The abundance of evidence, must be considered. Look at the Bill Cosby case. Legally, innocent, but would you leave your daughter, wife, mother alone with someone with this kind of reputation?

handedness 9y ago

> the nature of sexual harassment, and the often power imbalance between the harasser and victim, naturally provides the harasser with all the advantages. That is correct in cases where harassment has occurred, yes. In cases of false accusation, though, the accuser has nearly all of the advantages. And it's not as if it never happens, either: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_accusation_of_rape#Estimates_of_prevalence https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_accusation_of_rape#Estim... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_allegation_of_child_sexual_abuse#Prevalence https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_allegation_of_child_sexu... Which is why due process is important both legally, and culturally. While I understand how people directly impacted by the event (and their loved ones) have neither the inclination nor the capacity to withhold judgement, mob-like indignation on the part of the public about every story which is reported is a dynamic that hasn't served us well thus far, and the situation isn't showing any signs of improving.

ebola1717 9y ago
Your links say we can believe these allegations with 90-98% confidence. Actually, multiply that by 6 women, and that's 99.9999% confidence, assuming the low end of that. My request services only have to have a 99.9% success rate.
- thethirdone 9y ago
  That's assuming that the false accusations are statistically independent. I would expect false accusations to be more common in cases with more accusers.
- handedness 9y ago
  I didn't provide that to indicate a confidence level in the guilt of the accused, but to say that the reason we have due process is because serious allegations should be treated seriously, and the comments section of a tech 'blog isn't the place to act as judge, jury, or executioner. Else we're little better than places that hold mock trials and summary executions.
ithinkinstereo 9y ago
I see your points about false accusations, but how many false accusations cases involve multiple accusers spanning back years?
- handedness 9y ago
  I don't know, nor do I need to. That's the point. Serious accusations need to be tried in a manner that involves evidence, sworn testimony, counsel, etc., precisely because of their seriousness. In the meantime, online conjecture by parties with no standing should probably presume innocence until guilt is found, because a mob mentality should be beneath us. I know someone who was falsely accused of something serious–decades in prison type stuff–and the news coverage alone destroyed his business and put his family through hell. Anyone who's opposed to capital punishment because it prevents the accused from ever finding justice should also be concerned about the effects the court of public opinion can have on someone's life, and err on the side of withholding judgement when, again, there's no reason for us to judge this person unless we have direct dealings with the individual and need to make our own estimations out of self-interest. What's happening in this thread isn't about self-interest, it's about self-satisfaction. That's neither useful nor wise.
  - ithinkinstereo 9y ago
    > What's happening in this thread isn't about self-interest, it's about self-satisfaction. That's neither useful nor wise. You're making a reasonable, but I would argue, pedantic argument (as it applies to this situation). Caldbeck is not being tried in a court of law, but in the court of public opinion. The standards are looser, that's just a part of living in a community with others, there is a natural bit of self-policing. It's part of our instinctual nature as humans; we pattern-match, it can get us in trouble at times, but it's gotten us this far as a species. If he is innocent he is free to defend himself and provide counter-evidence. He is being rightfully pilloried given the many claims, over a long period of time, against him. The abundance of evidence, must be considered. Look at the Bill Cosby case. Legally, innocent, but would you leave your daughter, wife, mother alone with someone with this kind of reputation?