4 ms·

I don't think, given Scott's recent defense of Steve Hsu, that he'd really want people fired for doing ill-advised things, even if they could be reasonably cons

I don't think, given Scott's recent defense of Steve Hsu, that he'd really want people fired for doing ill-advised things, even if they could be reasonably construed as dangerous, unless harm was demonstrated. It's still disappointing that the journalist is making this choice.

stjohnswarts 6y ago
I think it's just in general dangerous and disruptive for the entire world to know who you are online. They will find you and threaten you and everyone you love. Sure only 1% of them are actually dangerous but it only takes one bullet or knife in the back from a psychotic person to end everything. Or just someone doing some crazy made up nonsense like pizzagate. The loonies are out there.
maxwelljoslyn 6y ago
Point taken regarding the Hsu case. Maybe I jumped the gun there. I don't want it to be the norm for any journalistic organ/employee to function/perform the way this one did. There are many ways to accomplish adoption of that norm, including (but certainly not limited to) firing people who do that.
AnthonyMouse 6y ago
There is a clear division to be made between firing someone for what they do on their own time vs. actions they take in the course of their employment for you. When being a responsible journalist is your job, it's not unreasonable to expect to get fired for not being a responsible journalist.
- arrrg 6y ago
  I think it’s completely unreasonable to fire someone for one instance of wrong behavior (with very narrow exceptions for something like stealing or sexual abuse). I’m very happy to live in a country where you cannot fire people just like that, even if they do something wrong. You have to give people second chances. I don’t get this “fire them” approach to anything wrong something does. People make mistakes. That just happens. To always fire people because of that makes no sense to me.
  - ALittleLight 6y ago
    Of course people make mistakes, but it's a mistake to confuse a deliberate and fully informed action with a mistake. The journalist knows Scott's concerns and has plenty of time to think through things and come to a decision, and came to the wrong one. If I was a janitor and spilled a bucket of water on the floor it would be wrong and cruel to fire me for that mistake. On the other hand, if I saw a customer come in to our store and said "Yo customer, we hate you, get out and never come back!" And then grabbed a bucket of water and dumped it on the customer... Well then I think firing me would make sense. The former was a mistake. The latter is an intentional and deliberate bad action.
    - Lewton 6y ago
      You seem to be attributing all sorts of malice to the journalist that Scott himself sees no reason to https://old.reddit.com/r/slatestarcodex/comments/he95ak/blog_deleted_due_to_nyt_threatening_doxxing_of/fvq3il7/ https://old.reddit.com/r/slatestarcodex/comments/he95ak/blog...
      - ALittleLight 6y ago
        I read him as saying the NYT is being "dumb and evil". I think it's an open question if they are dumb or cunning. I think they may intend or prefer a result like this. https://www.reddit.com/r/slatestarcodex/comments/he95ak/comment/fvpyacq https://www.reddit.com/r/slatestarcodex/comments/he95ak/comm...
    - arrrg 6y ago
      Deliberate bad actions can also be mistakes. If people don’t accept that they made I mistake then yeah, that’s an issue – and one where firing should again become an option, sure (basically that unwillingness to accept that is then the second offense). I do agree that the situation here is bit more complex since the public is involved. This seems serious enough that, I think, the challenge is more about the NYT making transparent their process, their decisions and what they did. I think that’s even more valuable than just firing someone. They should investigate which processes, guidelines, rules, etc. contributed to that behavior and how and wether they plan to change that. They should outline what they communicated to that reporter. They should apologize. I want an explanation and improvements, not someone to be fired. Also because I think more often than not people who actually did make a mistake are unlikely to do that again. They could be the problem and actually toxic, sure, that’s always a risk. But I think that’s ok.

stjohnswarts 6y ago

I think it's just in general dangerous and disruptive for the entire world to know who you are online. They will find you and threaten you and everyone you love. Sure only 1% of them are actually dangerous but it only takes one bullet or knife in the back from a psychotic person to end everything. Or just someone doing some crazy made up nonsense like pizzagate. The loonies are out there.

maxwelljoslyn 6y ago

Point taken regarding the Hsu case. Maybe I jumped the gun there. I don't want it to be the norm for any journalistic organ/employee to function/perform the way this one did. There are many ways to accomplish adoption of that norm, including (but certainly not limited to) firing people who do that.

AnthonyMouse 6y ago

There is a clear division to be made between firing someone for what they do on their own time vs. actions they take in the course of their employment for you. When being a responsible journalist is your job, it's not unreasonable to expect to get fired for not being a responsible journalist.

arrrg 6y ago
I think it’s completely unreasonable to fire someone for one instance of wrong behavior (with very narrow exceptions for something like stealing or sexual abuse). I’m very happy to live in a country where you cannot fire people just like that, even if they do something wrong. You have to give people second chances. I don’t get this “fire them” approach to anything wrong something does. People make mistakes. That just happens. To always fire people because of that makes no sense to me.
- ALittleLight 6y ago
  Of course people make mistakes, but it's a mistake to confuse a deliberate and fully informed action with a mistake. The journalist knows Scott's concerns and has plenty of time to think through things and come to a decision, and came to the wrong one. If I was a janitor and spilled a bucket of water on the floor it would be wrong and cruel to fire me for that mistake. On the other hand, if I saw a customer come in to our store and said "Yo customer, we hate you, get out and never come back!" And then grabbed a bucket of water and dumped it on the customer... Well then I think firing me would make sense. The former was a mistake. The latter is an intentional and deliberate bad action.
  - Lewton 6y ago
    You seem to be attributing all sorts of malice to the journalist that Scott himself sees no reason to https://old.reddit.com/r/slatestarcodex/comments/he95ak/blog_deleted_due_to_nyt_threatening_doxxing_of/fvq3il7/ https://old.reddit.com/r/slatestarcodex/comments/he95ak/blog...
    - ALittleLight 6y ago
      I read him as saying the NYT is being "dumb and evil". I think it's an open question if they are dumb or cunning. I think they may intend or prefer a result like this. https://www.reddit.com/r/slatestarcodex/comments/he95ak/comment/fvpyacq https://www.reddit.com/r/slatestarcodex/comments/he95ak/comm...
  - arrrg 6y ago
    Deliberate bad actions can also be mistakes. If people don’t accept that they made I mistake then yeah, that’s an issue – and one where firing should again become an option, sure (basically that unwillingness to accept that is then the second offense). I do agree that the situation here is bit more complex since the public is involved. This seems serious enough that, I think, the challenge is more about the NYT making transparent their process, their decisions and what they did. I think that’s even more valuable than just firing someone. They should investigate which processes, guidelines, rules, etc. contributed to that behavior and how and wether they plan to change that. They should outline what they communicated to that reporter. They should apologize. I want an explanation and improvements, not someone to be fired. Also because I think more often than not people who actually did make a mistake are unlikely to do that again. They could be the problem and actually toxic, sure, that’s always a risk. But I think that’s ok.