4 ms·

And it should also be clear that it's not even clear any gag orders have occurred. The entire evidence to support this thesis is: > @Skud: ok, unless someone t

And it should also be clear that it's not even clear any gag orders have occurred. The entire evidence to support this thesis is: > @Skud: ok, unless someone tells me otherwise, it looks like google employees who don’t support the names policy have been gagged. #nymwars > @Skud: @lizthegrey this is your chance to tell me i’m wrong, btw. Somebody not responding to your tweet is hardly proof employees are being gagged. Here's one idea: maybe Liz doesn't want to be the center of attention on this anymore.

starwed 15y ago
Maybe I misread this, but this seemed the basis for assuming it was a gag order: >On July 25th (four days ago) she stopped posting on the subject altogether. Looking at her stream, though, I see that she did post, without any comment, a link to a Wikipedia article talking about gag orders. Further, the poster says liz is a friend, so it seems likely they'd get some response to a direct question if she wasn't gagged.
- yanw 15y ago
  Maybe she just got tired of discussing this subject, as opposed to the author who seems to be on a crusade.
  - reemrevnivek 15y ago
    She posted 46 articles on the subject in less than a month. If you don't call that a crusade, I don't know what is. Of course, if you're suggesting that she simply got burnt out, that's a possibility. I could understand decreasing the number of essays written on the subject, but responding to a tweet seems like something that she'd do, given her previous crusade.
  - starwed 15y ago
    Heh, speaking of crusades: http://news.ycombinator.com/threads?id=yanw http://news.ycombinator.com/threads?id=yanw
orangecat 15y ago
This seems pretty definitive: https://plus.google.com/106912596786226524817/posts/6SBH6NxDcgq https://plus.google.com/106912596786226524817/posts/6SBH6NxD...
- carbonica 15y ago
  That sounds like an incredibly permissive company policy to me. Not a "gag order" with all the associated connotations.

starwed 15y ago

Maybe I misread this, but this seemed the basis for assuming it was a gag order: >On July 25th (four days ago) she stopped posting on the subject altogether. Looking at her stream, though, I see that she did post, without any comment, a link to a Wikipedia article talking about gag orders. Further, the poster says liz is a friend, so it seems likely they'd get some response to a direct question if she wasn't gagged.

yanw 15y ago
Maybe she just got tired of discussing this subject, as opposed to the author who seems to be on a crusade.
- reemrevnivek 15y ago
  She posted 46 articles on the subject in less than a month. If you don't call that a crusade, I don't know what is. Of course, if you're suggesting that she simply got burnt out, that's a possibility. I could understand decreasing the number of essays written on the subject, but responding to a tweet seems like something that she'd do, given her previous crusade.
- starwed 15y ago
  Heh, speaking of crusades: http://news.ycombinator.com/threads?id=yanw http://news.ycombinator.com/threads?id=yanw

orangecat 15y ago

This seems pretty definitive: https://plus.google.com/106912596786226524817/posts/6SBH6NxDcgq https://plus.google.com/106912596786226524817/posts/6SBH6NxD...

carbonica 15y ago
That sounds like an incredibly permissive company policy to me. Not a "gag order" with all the associated connotations.