> You are not worth having any conversations about this, since you are not someone whose humanity (let alone expertise recognized by journalists, governments, s

> You are not worth having any conversations about this, since you are not someone whose humanity (let alone expertise recognized by journalists, governments, scientists, civic organizations such as the electronic frontiers foundation etc) is acknowledged or valued in this company...I understand that the only things that mean anything at Google are levels, I’ve seen how my expertise has been completely dismissed. But now there’s an additional layer saying any privileged person can decide that they don’t want your paper out with zero conversation. This conclusion seems so non sequitur to the argument. There is literally nothing in the previous argument to suggest that any of this was motivated by anything other than a disagreement with the report. The argument presented by the researcher is conjecture. Coupled with the fact that she threatened to sue her employer and they kept her for a year? Any reasonable employer would see that her employment is a liability and dismiss her prior to a year. In the world of business, there is no jewel too precious to discard.