4 ms·
This is a conspiracy theory. Please don't amplify this disinformation. There is no proof anything this commenter is stating has anything to do with the issues i
by sappapp 7y ago
This is a conspiracy theory. Please don't amplify this disinformation. There is no proof anything this commenter is stating has anything to do with the issues in Iowa.
https://twitter.com/alexstamos/status/1224577210897453057 https://twitter.com/alexstamos/status/1224577210897453057
- _bxg1 7y agoAre you disputing the stated facts, or just the (unstated) connection to the other issues? A conflict of interest is a conflict of interest, no matter how far it may or may not have gone.
- sappapp 7y agoBoth. Shadow provides peer to peer engagement software, which is being used by the Buttigieg campaign. Just because the same software is being used in Iowa doesn't mean there is a conflict of interest. https://shadowinc.io/ https://shadowinc.io/
- ameister14 7y agoBut you're not really disputing the facts there - the CEO's husband being an advisor, Buttigieg's organizing director being a former employee, etc?
- sappapp 7y agoNo one has provided evidence of this either. But, if the evidence is presented it still doesn't prove that there is a conflict of interest.
- aksss 7y agoI think the standard is to avoid the appearance of a conflict, not to have plausible deniability. I think the person’s point is that it doesn’t look good, and this is the kind of scenario where _you need everything to look good_, because when shit like this happens, it erodes confidence all the more.
- silicon2401 7y agoWhich specific claims are false?
- sappapp 7y agoAs far as I know, all of it. The commenter hasn't provided any sources, and I can't find any evidence of a conflict of interest. As it stands, this is a blatant attempt to discredit the app developer, the Buttigieg campaign, and the DNC.
- tempsy 7y agoI've listed connections between the app developer and Buttigieg. Those connections are real. There's no conspiracy there.
- sappapp 7y agoYou are implying that the app developer, the Buttigieg campaign, former Hillary Clinton staffers, and the DNC are working together in bad faith. Along with the context of the article, you are implying that there is a connection between the aforementioned parties and declining the DHS' offer to test the app.
- creaghpatr 7y ago>You are conspiring that the app developer You're not even using the word 'conspiring' correctly.
- sappapp 7y agoYou're right. I edited it to "implying."
- smileysteve 7y agoFYI, it would be implying. An implication (by the speaker) is inferred (by the listener).
- sappapp 7y agoThanks! TIL
- tempsy 7y agoI've said nothing about a conspiracy. I've only said there's a clear conflict of interest, which I stand by. You shouldn't hire a developer that is ideologically driven and tilted toward certain candidates over others, and has very clear close connections with a single campaign.
- codingslave 7y agoCalling something a conspiracy theory is a new way to shame people who hold opinions that are different than your own.
- streb-lo 7y agoYou're saying that like the anti-vaxx/chem-trail crowd don't deserve to be shamed. Sometimes people are wrong. If you don't like getting callled out, argue your position.
- codingslave 7y agoYou're saying that like pointing out that the Hillary people ran the development for this app is similar to anti vaccine arguments. They arent similar.
- streb-lo 7y ago> Calling something a conspiracy theory is a new way to shame people who hold opinions that are different than your own. Is a vastly more broad statement. All I'm pointing out is that anti-vaxx people would say the exact same thing. Answer challenges with facts and arguments, not useless bold claims.
- edm0nd 7y agoIt makes no sense to pick a technology provider without a real RFP process.