3 ms·
1) If people are really interested in the topic, they should read the source material and draw their own conclusions. I thought the article's characterization
by aluminussoma 6y ago
1) If people are really interested in the topic, they should read the source material and draw their own conclusions.
I thought the article's characterization of Westervelt's tweet was incorrect. The author claimed that Westervelt "inadvertently revealed how the fear of being tarred by association motivated (Westervelt) to turn on (Roost)". Instead, Westervelt's opinion comes across as more nuanced.
2) I am happy I keep semi-anonymous accounts. In an age where it's easy to be the internet villain of the day, I thank the heavens that Natural Language Processing hasn't reached the point of deanonymizing me yet.
- kelnos 6y agoI agree with your point about the mischaracterization of Westervelt's tweet, after reading some longer explanations from her on Twitter. However, I do think it's notable that she'd had repeated, recurring problems with Roost in the past but didn't actually do anything firm about it until there was a big public brouhaha that could make her look bad if she didn't do anything. That doesn't absolve Roost from any blame here, but I think it does suggest that Westervelt's motivation for cutting Roost loose was at least partly informed by a desire to not suffer backlash herself. I don't think there's anything wrong with that, per se, but let's not pretend that everyone here is doing things solely for the right reasons.