3 ms·

I agree. Her reaction was ridiculous and aggressive and was done in public and in reference to her work. Her employer absolutely should have disciplined her. Ho

by tgb 8y ago

I agree. Her reaction was ridiculous and aggressive and was done in public and in reference to her work. Her employer absolutely should have disciplined her. However, the increasingly aggressive presence of internet mobs saying "fire this person or we'll make a terrible fuss!" over minor matters is absurd, getting worse, and is being abused by people of all political identities. It's just not an acceptable way for our society to function and the idea that it gets lauded by whichever side gets it to "work" is disgusting. Unfortunately the internet appears just to allow amplifying the grievances of the loudest subset of any group. I hope companies learn that picking sides by firing someone does not resolve the matter and just pisses off more people. Hopefully that tones down their response and then makes the internet mobs less aggressive because they don't get as much satisfaction out of it.

makomk 8y ago
The folks leading the charge on how terrible and unacceptable this is were, from what I've seen, mostly the same folks campaigning to get folks who aren't part of their clique fired over non-work-related political views and social media posts. It feels like just another aspect of the same thing: fire the people we want fired and employ the people we want you to employ, or we'll make a terrible fuss and drag your reputation through the mud.
LyndsySimon 8y ago
> However, the increasingly aggressive presence of internet mobs saying "fire this person or we'll make a terrible fuss!" over minor matters is absurd, getting worse, and is being abused by people of all political identities. This is how free markets work, though. The beliefs of the customers drive their purchase decisions. It's completely rational for a customer to say "I don't want to support a company that employs someone who behaves like this". Threatening to take their money elsewhere is their sole recourse, and one that is effective only in large groups. > I hope companies learn that picking sides by firing someone does not resolve the matter and just pisses off more people. It's really simple from an economic perspective: does firing this person result in more lost customers than being silent? I strongly suspect the answer to this is "no", and firing the employee is the better path. After all, the whole purpose of hiring an employee is to generate more value than they cost. In this case, the employee's actions were a large net negative. > Hopefully that tones down their response and then makes the internet mobs less aggressive because they don't get as much satisfaction out of it. I really don't see this ever happening. Even if the vast majority of companies decided to adopt a policy of turning a deaf ear to customer feedback, the only result would be new companies stepping up to fill the void.
bassman9000 8y ago
* Her employer absolutely should have disciplined her. * If her reaction to polite and constructive criticism from a user, and a customer, was this over the top, the reaction to a harsher comment (a disciplinary one), from her employer, wouldn't have been any better. Better to terminate the relationship before it gets nasty.
- maxerickson 8y ago
  It wasn't constructive criticism.

by tgb 8y ago

makomk 8y ago

The folks leading the charge on how terrible and unacceptable this is were, from what I've seen, mostly the same folks campaigning to get folks who aren't part of their clique fired over non-work-related political views and social media posts. It feels like just another aspect of the same thing: fire the people we want fired and employ the people we want you to employ, or we'll make a terrible fuss and drag your reputation through the mud.

LyndsySimon 8y ago

> However, the increasingly aggressive presence of internet mobs saying "fire this person or we'll make a terrible fuss!" over minor matters is absurd, getting worse, and is being abused by people of all political identities. This is how free markets work, though. The beliefs of the customers drive their purchase decisions. It's completely rational for a customer to say "I don't want to support a company that employs someone who behaves like this". Threatening to take their money elsewhere is their sole recourse, and one that is effective only in large groups. > I hope companies learn that picking sides by firing someone does not resolve the matter and just pisses off more people. It's really simple from an economic perspective: does firing this person result in more lost customers than being silent? I strongly suspect the answer to this is "no", and firing the employee is the better path. After all, the whole purpose of hiring an employee is to generate more value than they cost. In this case, the employee's actions were a large net negative. > Hopefully that tones down their response and then makes the internet mobs less aggressive because they don't get as much satisfaction out of it. I really don't see this ever happening. Even if the vast majority of companies decided to adopt a policy of turning a deaf ear to customer feedback, the only result would be new companies stepping up to fill the void.

bassman9000 8y ago

* Her employer absolutely should have disciplined her. * If her reaction to polite and constructive criticism from a user, and a customer, was this over the top, the reaction to a harsher comment (a disciplinary one), from her employer, wouldn't have been any better. Better to terminate the relationship before it gets nasty.

maxerickson 8y ago
It wasn't constructive criticism.