3 ms·

I had an idea for how to deal with that sort of harassment. There's no point in the harassment unless the harassee knows where it's coming from. But revealing t

I had an idea for how to deal with that sort of harassment. There's no point in the harassment unless the harassee knows where it's coming from. But revealing that would allow Wirecard to be caught. So you have to play a game of "WHAT'S THAT? I'M HARD OF HEARING! YOU'LL HAVE TO SPEAK INTO THIS MICROPHONE!" And make public pronouncements that you don't know who's harassing you. Could make a good premise for a comedy. Willful ignorance.

6510 6y ago
If what people say matters to me depends on who they are and what things they've accomplished (relevant to the context) Anything that doesn't follow that format just makes me laugh.
TazeTSchnitzel 6y ago
> There's no point in the harassment unless the harassee knows where it's coming from. The harrasser doesn't have to say they're doing it, though. The victim probably knows who it's from even if it's completely anonymous.
- ByteJockey 6y ago
  That's the point of the pronouncements. If the harasser thinks you haven't put two and two together yet, they have two options. 1. Quit 2. Be more obvious 1 is what you want, 2 is better evidence in court, win-win.
  - kmonsen 6y ago
    Or they can not play your game and keep doing what they are doing as it is working. Just because you say they only have two options doesn't mean it is true. There are almost always more options available to others than you can think of, and in this case it is fairly obvious.
    - ByteJockey 6y ago
      > Or they can not play your game and keep doing what they are doing as it is working. I was assuming a hypothetical where you can convince them you actually don't know who is doing it. Obviously if they think you do know, the whole thing changes.
AndrewBissell 6y ago
> There's no point in the harassment unless the harassee knows where it's coming from. But revealing that would allow Wirecard to be caught. Not really. If you look at the circumstances around this fraud, it's clear that "they are harassing short sellers" would have been just one more grain on the pile of evidence that was willfully ignored as it was going on, or one more legal violation for authorities to look the other way on. It's not just Wirecard, there are very often media reports of short sellers or whistleblowers being targeted for harassment by companies while they are engaged in ongoing fraud and it rarely makes any difference to broad public perception or regulator action.
- hkeide 6y ago
  Makes me think of a big US automaker that doesn't like short sellers.

6510 6y ago

If what people say matters to me depends on who they are and what things they've accomplished (relevant to the context) Anything that doesn't follow that format just makes me laugh.

TazeTSchnitzel 6y ago

> There's no point in the harassment unless the harassee knows where it's coming from. The harrasser doesn't have to say they're doing it, though. The victim probably knows who it's from even if it's completely anonymous.

ByteJockey 6y ago
That's the point of the pronouncements. If the harasser thinks you haven't put two and two together yet, they have two options. 1. Quit 2. Be more obvious 1 is what you want, 2 is better evidence in court, win-win.
- kmonsen 6y ago
  Or they can not play your game and keep doing what they are doing as it is working. Just because you say they only have two options doesn't mean it is true. There are almost always more options available to others than you can think of, and in this case it is fairly obvious.
  - ByteJockey 6y ago
    > Or they can not play your game and keep doing what they are doing as it is working. I was assuming a hypothetical where you can convince them you actually don't know who is doing it. Obviously if they think you do know, the whole thing changes.

AndrewBissell 6y ago

> There's no point in the harassment unless the harassee knows where it's coming from. But revealing that would allow Wirecard to be caught. Not really. If you look at the circumstances around this fraud, it's clear that "they are harassing short sellers" would have been just one more grain on the pile of evidence that was willfully ignored as it was going on, or one more legal violation for authorities to look the other way on. It's not just Wirecard, there are very often media reports of short sellers or whistleblowers being targeted for harassment by companies while they are engaged in ongoing fraud and it rarely makes any difference to broad public perception or regulator action.

hkeide 6y ago
Makes me think of a big US automaker that doesn't like short sellers.