4 ms·

"Yes I have extensive experience with discrimination, and it was much worse than any founder that had to put up with being hit on. Does this make my point more

by Rariel 16y ago

"Yes I have extensive experience with discrimination, and it was much worse than any founder that had to put up with being hit on. Does this make my point more valid or less?" I find it interesting you said you have experience with discrimination and not that you are a member of a minority group, that's what I asked--not whether you've been discriminated against. As a person who has been discriminated against, I find it completely pointless to say my suffering is worse than anothers--how would I know since I've never experienced it? I challenge you to think of the same thing in regards to this. Moreover, I never said that it would make your point +/- valid, you created that premise on your own. Your post hardly seemed like it came from somebody who has suffered discrimination, def not on the level you claim. "The point isn't a defense of discrimination, but merely a question of total impact. A guy hit on you and you didn't like it? Tell that VC to get bent and go make money without him. " This assumes you're only going to run in to a few bad apples. Have you stopped to consider it may be way more than a few in this instance? Perhaps it is a systematic and continual thing. "This is true, I admit I'm not a regular jezebel reader and must have missed the article where they mentioned that. Or ever seen an article anywhere lamenting this." Again, you've applied your own ideas to my words--I said that just because you've never heard about it doesn't mean that it hasn't happened. Your smart remark about Jezebel is non-sequitur to my comment and further more unappreciated. Jezebel covers pop culture and blue collar work is anything but pop-culture. "I'd cite my stats, but looks like someone already beat me to it." Perhaps you should re-read my comment again, I asked you about methodology thus getting at a deeper analysis of the statistics you site. Also read my response to the comment you're talking about--I took the time to actually read in to the methodology on stats you talked about and expanded on it. Perhaps you take all statistics on face value but I do not. In general, I think it's kind of funny that you typed such a long response without truly reading what I had to say.

johngalt 16y ago
Quoted: "I couldn't help but wonder while reading this comment--have you ever experienced any sort of discrimination or are you a member of any minority group (person of color, gay, non-christian, etc.)?" You specifically asked if I experienced discrimination or was a minority. I answered accurately. So I need to "stop to consider" if VC's are mostly bad apples based on a few anecdotes on a site that caters to women, but national DOJ statistics are doubtful? Are you serious? Perhaps you're right, I'm missing the point, what exactly are you trying to say?
- Rariel 16y ago
  You answered accurately but choose to answer only one part. And to that I still say " that's interesting." "Have you stopped to consider it may be way more than a few in this instance?" Key words there in this instance. I asked you to consider that in the context of what we're talking about there can be more than a few VCs that are bad apples. And in regards to DOJ stats, again, it's about context. I mentioned their methodology citing specific examples putting the numbers in context. You in turn don't reply to that instead you respond to my general statement at the end? And then act as if there is something wrong with my argument? What's the point of this if you don't address any of my substantive points and go for the easy quick shots. If you can't offer responses that are actually based on the substance of my comments why even bother responding? You don't have to answer. I was interested in a discourse, but this has devolved in to something that is not that. Have a nice night.

by Rariel 16y ago

johngalt 16y ago

Quoted: "I couldn't help but wonder while reading this comment--have you ever experienced any sort of discrimination or are you a member of any minority group (person of color, gay, non-christian, etc.)?" You specifically asked if I experienced discrimination or was a minority. I answered accurately. So I need to "stop to consider" if VC's are mostly bad apples based on a few anecdotes on a site that caters to women, but national DOJ statistics are doubtful? Are you serious? Perhaps you're right, I'm missing the point, what exactly are you trying to say?

Rariel 16y ago
You answered accurately but choose to answer only one part. And to that I still say " that's interesting." "Have you stopped to consider it may be way more than a few in this instance?" Key words there in this instance. I asked you to consider that in the context of what we're talking about there can be more than a few VCs that are bad apples. And in regards to DOJ stats, again, it's about context. I mentioned their methodology citing specific examples putting the numbers in context. You in turn don't reply to that instead you respond to my general statement at the end? And then act as if there is something wrong with my argument? What's the point of this if you don't address any of my substantive points and go for the easy quick shots. If you can't offer responses that are actually based on the substance of my comments why even bother responding? You don't have to answer. I was interested in a discourse, but this has devolved in to something that is not that. Have a nice night.