5 ms·
> “We require members on our platform to have real identities and we will not allow anonymous questions in all hands meetings in the future And just like that
by Avicebron 6y ago
> “We require members on our platform to have real identities and we will not allow anonymous questions in all hands meetings in the future
And just like that the wrong-think was purged from the ranks. No question is legitimate if it goes against the party line. Yikes, hopefully there is a way to actively fight this.
- colejohnson66 6y agoIf preventing people from asking anonymously is censorship, then what isn’t? Seriously, if you want to be anonymous with your racism, take it somewhere else; LinkedIn is not required to host your garbage. Edit: LinkedIn is not banning people for being racist. They’re simply saying, “if you want to be racist, do it with your real name.” There’s no censorship with that.
- pluto9 6y agoIf doing something with the express purpose of silencing certain perspectives isn't censorship, then what is? > LinkedIn is not banning people for being racist. They’re simply saying, “if you want to be racist, do it with your real name.” "So we can ban (fire) you." Edit: Also, for the record, I don't accept the premise that they're racist. This post has a hint of "when did you stop beating your wife?" to it.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- Avicebron 6y agoIt's not just about racism, it's the concept of anonymity being eroded so people tacitly know not to ask what could very well be a legitimate question. Haven't you heard that phrase "no dumb questions" as you were growing and being encouraged to learn. That's being taken away, and besides, you've already written off what they said as overtly racist. What if it's a question? What if it's a place they want to get into as part of the debate and broader framing of the question. Did you read the article? Were those questions overtly racist?