4 ms·

I think that a system that allows people who have produced (Page, Rubin) to be subject to to the tantrums (legal and otherwise) of those who didn't is a broken

I think that a system that allows people who have produced (Page, Rubin) to be subject to to the tantrums (legal and otherwise) of those who didn't is a broken system.

mortdeus 8y ago
In my view a functional society is one where people are paid what their owed. Andy Rubin is owed his cut for android. And the women are owed what he promised them if only they'd sucked a little... well you get the picture. This is why things like this need to be handled in courtroom rather than the court of public opinion so a jury can decide whether the allegations warrant damages being paid out to the victims. The idea that you can just step in and deny somebody compensation without a judge present is frankly shocking for me to consider that this is where half of our society thinks we should go. If we started taking all the wealth from every man who has ever came off as creepy to woman, we'd be nation of men who are paupers and women who are desperately trying to give all the power back so they can find themselves actually attracted to the people they have to mate with.
- dmix 8y ago
  So given this was still ‘allegations’ of sexual assault and not anything like a conviction in court, does the board have to act differently? Is there still a presumption of innocence, absent glaring evidence? I have a feeling this will always be a bit of a grey area out of pure practicality. But there seems to be a big push these days for immediate punishment, or everything gets the brakes put on, as soon as there is an allegation. Which considering the countless examples of failed convictions and direct examples of wrongful convictions (google is full of examples) this seems like a very dangerous road to go down.
  - DanBC 8y ago
    > not anything like a conviction in court, does the board have to act differently? Not sure what happens in the US, but in England even the courts behave differently from each other. The criminal court uses "beyond all reasonable doubt" while family courts use "balance of probabilities". A man can be found not guilty at criminal trial, and still have his children removed by family court because the finding of fact session at family court decides he more likely than not did the things he is accused of. A private organisation is free to do what they like, so long is it complies with the law and with the contracts they've drawn up.
  - int_19h 8y ago
    If they presumed him to be innocent, they should have defended him. According to the story, they basically told him that it's leave or get fired.
- bitL 8y ago
  I agree, performance rewards should be separate from unrelated, potentially criminal acts - those should be handled at the court. Of course, if the reward is from the criminal act itself (quite a few cases of such at Wall Street), they should be denied, but that's wishful thinking and those perpetrators would get unquestionable backing from their companies until it blows up publicly, at which point everybody would wash their hands.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
SquishyPanda23 8y ago
I'm curious to hear your solution to this perceived problem.

I think that a system that allows people who have produced (Page, Rubin) to be subject to to the tantrums (legal and otherwise) of those who didn't is a broken system.

mortdeus 8y ago

In my view a functional society is one where people are paid what their owed. Andy Rubin is owed his cut for android. And the women are owed what he promised them if only they'd sucked a little... well you get the picture. This is why things like this need to be handled in courtroom rather than the court of public opinion so a jury can decide whether the allegations warrant damages being paid out to the victims. The idea that you can just step in and deny somebody compensation without a judge present is frankly shocking for me to consider that this is where half of our society thinks we should go. If we started taking all the wealth from every man who has ever came off as creepy to woman, we'd be nation of men who are paupers and women who are desperately trying to give all the power back so they can find themselves actually attracted to the people they have to mate with.

dmix 8y ago
So given this was still ‘allegations’ of sexual assault and not anything like a conviction in court, does the board have to act differently? Is there still a presumption of innocence, absent glaring evidence? I have a feeling this will always be a bit of a grey area out of pure practicality. But there seems to be a big push these days for immediate punishment, or everything gets the brakes put on, as soon as there is an allegation. Which considering the countless examples of failed convictions and direct examples of wrongful convictions (google is full of examples) this seems like a very dangerous road to go down.
- DanBC 8y ago
  > not anything like a conviction in court, does the board have to act differently? Not sure what happens in the US, but in England even the courts behave differently from each other. The criminal court uses "beyond all reasonable doubt" while family courts use "balance of probabilities". A man can be found not guilty at criminal trial, and still have his children removed by family court because the finding of fact session at family court decides he more likely than not did the things he is accused of. A private organisation is free to do what they like, so long is it complies with the law and with the contracts they've drawn up.
- int_19h 8y ago
  If they presumed him to be innocent, they should have defended him. According to the story, they basically told him that it's leave or get fired.
bitL 8y ago
I agree, performance rewards should be separate from unrelated, potentially criminal acts - those should be handled at the court. Of course, if the reward is from the criminal act itself (quite a few cases of such at Wall Street), they should be denied, but that's wishful thinking and those perpetrators would get unquestionable backing from their companies until it blows up publicly, at which point everybody would wash their hands.

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

SquishyPanda23 8y ago

I'm curious to hear your solution to this perceived problem.