4 ms·

I don't have time to go through all of that. Evan emails seem like nothing burger. Sorry, have you ever met college students or even school students? Both girls

I don't have time to go through all of that. Evan emails seem like nothing burger. Sorry, have you ever met college students or even school students? Both girls and boys. Because they all call each other names, fat/bitch/slut shaming is done more by other girls to girls than boys. Again, only saw emails. Even then, all of that seems more outlier than any programming community. Not everyone is a billionaire programmer responsible for putting social media cringe in front of our eyes. Please show me convicted for [reason] reports. I am convinced everytime I read these articles, the author is trying to see things that aren't there or it's hard to verify the validity. Note that I don't condone the behaviour but should you really be painting majority of population as some sort of saint to highlight the evil? Because they aren't. Alcoholism and drug rate among youngsters says otherwise.

DonHopkins 6y ago
Why would I "please show you" anything after you just proudly announced that you didn't bother reading what I just finished showing you? If you wanted to make a stronger argument, you should at least pretend to have read what you're glibly dismissing out of hand, instead of preemptively admitting that you don't bother reading what anyone else says, and that there's no point in replying to you. HN is not a forum for announcing you have not read things, then criticizing and dismissing them anyway. Don't you have better things to do than rationalizing and defending Frat Bro toxicity? If you don't have time to go through all that, then you shouldn't waste your time replying to dismiss it all, either.
- searchableguy 6y ago
  I did read through it hence the criticism but I didn't go past the Evan Spielberg and Mark Zuckerberg articles. If someone writes an article based on the emails, you would look at the emails because they are the source. Why should I bother reading opinion of a writer when I can look at the source? If your first few links don't show the problem, people wouldn't be willing to put in effort. I thought that was obvious.
  - DonHopkins 6y ago
    Oh so you're a nihilistic skeptic that those were authentic misogynistic emails from Evan Spielberg, and that it's only the opinion of the The Atlantic and Tech Crunch and all the other sources who wrote about it, including the Provost of Stanford University himself? https://vator.tv/news/2014-05-31-stanford-denounces-spiegel-over-leaked-e-mails https://vator.tv/news/2014-05-31-stanford-denounces-spiegel-... >In a letter sent to that was sent out to the entire Stanford undergraduate community, and obtained by the Huffington Post, Stanford University Provost John Etchemendy called the e-mails "crude, offensive, and demeaning to women." >"Like most of you, male and female, I found those messages abhorrent. I am writing now to convey clearly that the sentiments expressed in these emails do not reflect what we, as members of the Stanford community, expect of one another," the letter said. Have you got anything to stand on better than your "boys will be boys ¯\_(ツ)_/¯" argument? Can you provide some evidence for your conspiracy theory, such as a quote of Evan denying that he wrote those emails, or Stanford University Provost John Etchemendy retracting his statement that Evan's e-mails were "crude, offensive, and demeaning to women"? Is there a source for your conspiracy theory, or did you make it up yourself just now? I thought you had better things to do with your time that defending the honor of Frat Bros. So give me a link to your proof Evan Spielberg didn't send those emails.
    - searchableguy 6y ago
      Again, I only looked at the source - http://valleywag.gawker.com/fuck-bitches-get-leid-the-sleazy-frat-emails-of-snap-1582604137 http://valleywag.gawker.com/fuck-bitches-get-leid-the-sleazy... Which is what you should have linked and let people make their mind. I agree it's pretty assy. What are you looking for me to say? You are calling tech community toxic and frat boy asses because some billionaire ceo is a douche bag? I don't know how to reply to that. I already cleared that up. I am not defending him. I don't condone that behaviour but it's not far fetched for college students to be like that. It's not a disease specific to tech community. Tech bros are not special unicorns. Every field has those.
      - DonHopkins 6y ago
        Get over your fragility. I was specifically calling Snapchat and Uber toxic because of their Frat Bro leaders and culture, an undisputed fact which is very widely known and reported on. There is absolutely zero credible evidence that Evan Spiegel didn't write those misogynistic emails, and overwhelming credible evidence that he did, so you should stop believing and intimating that it's a hoax, if you can't prove it. But yes, a lot of tech companies are terribly toxic, and a lot of Frat Boys are terrible asses, who graduate (but don't grow up) to be Tech Bros, and work in the tech industry. But they don't need you to deny it and rationalize it and protect their fragile feelings from criticism for them, they need to STOP. If your only point is that "every field has those", and you think I disagree, then read my other postings about Jared Kushner's coronavirus "Frat Party". Every field having those doesn't justify or counter tech having those, and if you don't have the time to read the source evidence that I linked to before you took the time to announce you didn't read it and then glibly asked for source evidence that will take you even more time to read, then you won't bother reading anything else, and you're not arguing in good faith. The more frequently you reply, the more skeptical I become of your claim that you don't have the time to read the original evidence I posted. If you don't know how to reply to that, and didn't have the time to read the evidence, then you should not have replied in the first place, or again, and again. And especially not a fourth time.

DonHopkins 6y ago

Why would I "please show you" anything after you just proudly announced that you didn't bother reading what I just finished showing you? If you wanted to make a stronger argument, you should at least pretend to have read what you're glibly dismissing out of hand, instead of preemptively admitting that you don't bother reading what anyone else says, and that there's no point in replying to you. HN is not a forum for announcing you have not read things, then criticizing and dismissing them anyway. Don't you have better things to do than rationalizing and defending Frat Bro toxicity? If you don't have time to go through all that, then you shouldn't waste your time replying to dismiss it all, either.

searchableguy 6y ago
I did read through it hence the criticism but I didn't go past the Evan Spielberg and Mark Zuckerberg articles. If someone writes an article based on the emails, you would look at the emails because they are the source. Why should I bother reading opinion of a writer when I can look at the source? If your first few links don't show the problem, people wouldn't be willing to put in effort. I thought that was obvious.
- DonHopkins 6y ago
  Oh so you're a nihilistic skeptic that those were authentic misogynistic emails from Evan Spielberg, and that it's only the opinion of the The Atlantic and Tech Crunch and all the other sources who wrote about it, including the Provost of Stanford University himself? https://vator.tv/news/2014-05-31-stanford-denounces-spiegel-over-leaked-e-mails https://vator.tv/news/2014-05-31-stanford-denounces-spiegel-... >In a letter sent to that was sent out to the entire Stanford undergraduate community, and obtained by the Huffington Post, Stanford University Provost John Etchemendy called the e-mails "crude, offensive, and demeaning to women." >"Like most of you, male and female, I found those messages abhorrent. I am writing now to convey clearly that the sentiments expressed in these emails do not reflect what we, as members of the Stanford community, expect of one another," the letter said. Have you got anything to stand on better than your "boys will be boys ¯\_(ツ)_/¯" argument? Can you provide some evidence for your conspiracy theory, such as a quote of Evan denying that he wrote those emails, or Stanford University Provost John Etchemendy retracting his statement that Evan's e-mails were "crude, offensive, and demeaning to women"? Is there a source for your conspiracy theory, or did you make it up yourself just now? I thought you had better things to do with your time that defending the honor of Frat Bros. So give me a link to your proof Evan Spielberg didn't send those emails.
  - searchableguy 6y ago
    Again, I only looked at the source - http://valleywag.gawker.com/fuck-bitches-get-leid-the-sleazy-frat-emails-of-snap-1582604137 http://valleywag.gawker.com/fuck-bitches-get-leid-the-sleazy... Which is what you should have linked and let people make their mind. I agree it's pretty assy. What are you looking for me to say? You are calling tech community toxic and frat boy asses because some billionaire ceo is a douche bag? I don't know how to reply to that. I already cleared that up. I am not defending him. I don't condone that behaviour but it's not far fetched for college students to be like that. It's not a disease specific to tech community. Tech bros are not special unicorns. Every field has those.
    - DonHopkins 6y ago
      Get over your fragility. I was specifically calling Snapchat and Uber toxic because of their Frat Bro leaders and culture, an undisputed fact which is very widely known and reported on. There is absolutely zero credible evidence that Evan Spiegel didn't write those misogynistic emails, and overwhelming credible evidence that he did, so you should stop believing and intimating that it's a hoax, if you can't prove it. But yes, a lot of tech companies are terribly toxic, and a lot of Frat Boys are terrible asses, who graduate (but don't grow up) to be Tech Bros, and work in the tech industry. But they don't need you to deny it and rationalize it and protect their fragile feelings from criticism for them, they need to STOP. If your only point is that "every field has those", and you think I disagree, then read my other postings about Jared Kushner's coronavirus "Frat Party". Every field having those doesn't justify or counter tech having those, and if you don't have the time to read the source evidence that I linked to before you took the time to announce you didn't read it and then glibly asked for source evidence that will take you even more time to read, then you won't bother reading anything else, and you're not arguing in good faith. The more frequently you reply, the more skeptical I become of your claim that you don't have the time to read the original evidence I posted. If you don't know how to reply to that, and didn't have the time to read the evidence, then you should not have replied in the first place, or again, and again. And especially not a fourth time.