4 ms·

I think the problem with this article is that it's very easy to (mis-) interpret as her exaggerating the scale of the problem. "Some of the men who work at Spa

I think the problem with this article is that it's very easy to (mis-) interpret as her exaggerating the scale of the problem. "Some of the men who work at SpaceX [..] stare at women while they work" That struck me as a rather odd thing to say. "a fellow intern approached me in our intern housing and grabbed my butt" That is definitely unacceptable, but if I understand things correctly, she was living together with other interns to save money. So that was her roommate, doing bad stuff in his free time. I'm not quite sure if SpaceX should manage their employee's life at that level. "learn from our colonial past and incorporate indigenous expertise" That sounds to me like a dog whistle for her subgroup of social justice warriors. In any case, my boss would also be pretty surprised if someone used that word choice for arguing their case. Similarly, she mentions "very small group of women and nonbinary people" the latter of which seems hyperbolic to me because nonbinary people are rare in general, so it's not unexpected that they would be as rare at SpaceX as they are in overall society. So while I agree with her statement in the abstract that SpaceX should have a better work culture, there's too many little oddities in that letter for me to agree with it.

dang 5y ago
"Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith." https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- mam4 5y ago
  Hard to assume good faith from a article you strongly suspect is doing precisely the opposite.. are we supposed to just not comment at all except to say "oh sexual harassement is bad" ? Theres a strong case that false accusations can be terribly detrimental for women that get ACTUALLY harrassed and assaulted. Not just people who get offendes at literally every fashionable issue to be offended these days (sexism, racisme/colonialism, and environment in that EXACT SAME ARTICLE)
- fxtentacle 5y ago
  It appears the article URL changed while I was replying to it. But the new URL contains even more things that seem odd to me. "I found my way through an abusive upbringing, leaving home at a young age, subsequent homelessness, and sexual assault in college" That is horrible, but in the context of the letter I would be surprised if it will not affect how one experiences the world. It's easy for me to assume that people are acting in good faith if they do stupid things because I have never had any of those negative experiences. So the same people doing the same action might be interpreted as "stupid fun" by me and as "abuse" by her. "I had to continue living in the residence with this man." That sentence reads weird to me because I assume that SpaceX will not require you to live at any specific house. So based on my experience of the world, it should have been easy for her to move. I can fully understand if she wants that guy to move instead of her giving up the apartment, but then she should say so instead of claiming that it was impossible to move. "Elon Musk’s behavior bears a remarkable similarity to the behavior of a sadistic and abusive man who had previously been part of my life." I do feel sorry for this person, because she clearly had many bad things happen to her, which never happened to me. So maybe that's just me noticing how privileged I am. But if her goal is to push SpaceX towards objectively improving their work environment, I wonder if it would have been better to not mention this. Because like I said in my first comment, this makes it very easy to misinterpret her (probably valid) criticism as a personal vendetta.
  - itsdrewmiller 5y ago
    "Intern housing" implies that the specific housing is provided or subsidized by SpaceX. Of course she's not forced to live there, but she would probably have to pay money to move. (And why shouldn't the person who assaulted her be the one to move?) It still doesn't seem to me that you are reading the article in good faith.
    - fxtentacle 5y ago
      She wrote "I had to". You wrote "Of course she's not forced to". So in effect, you highlighted the same odd word choice as me. And in my opinion, "I have to" is very different from "I don't want to for financial reasons" or "I don't want to for fairness reasons". And yes, I was trying to find examples for how this specific article could be misinterpreted in bad faith.
- coddle-hark 5y ago
  This comes across as a bad faith interpretation of the comment you’re replying to. I read it as providing additional context and a (slightly?) different perspective, not as an attempt at misrepresenting the article to push an agenda.
  - dang 5y ago
    A serious response to the article would begin by acknowledging the strongest parts of the complaint.
    - TigeriusKirk 5y ago
      If you actually want this to be how discussion works on this site, you need to make the point much more consistently than you do.
      - HeyLaughingBoy 5y ago
        Seriously? You need to be told that?
      - dang 5y ago
        Consistency is a red herring because it's outright impossible. We can't come close to seeing everything that gets posted here. If you see a post that ought to have had some moderation but hasn't, the likeliest explanation is that we didn't see it. You can help by flagging it or emailing us at hn@ycombinator.com. https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sort=byDate&type=comment&query=likeliest%20by:dang https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sor...
    - simondotau 5y ago
      Establishing the argument is the role of the article being linked to, not a job for every single commenter wishing to express an opinion. A serious response can always criticise the weak parts of any argument without having to guess which parts are considered stronger by others. Or in the alternative, perhaps we should not have any discussion on this topic at all until SpaceX offers a formal response, at which point you can chastise everyone for failing to acknowledge BOTH the strongest parts of this article and the strongest parts of SpaceX's response.

dang 5y ago

"Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith." https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

mam4 5y ago
Hard to assume good faith from a article you strongly suspect is doing precisely the opposite.. are we supposed to just not comment at all except to say "oh sexual harassement is bad" ? Theres a strong case that false accusations can be terribly detrimental for women that get ACTUALLY harrassed and assaulted. Not just people who get offendes at literally every fashionable issue to be offended these days (sexism, racisme/colonialism, and environment in that EXACT SAME ARTICLE)
fxtentacle 5y ago
It appears the article URL changed while I was replying to it. But the new URL contains even more things that seem odd to me. "I found my way through an abusive upbringing, leaving home at a young age, subsequent homelessness, and sexual assault in college" That is horrible, but in the context of the letter I would be surprised if it will not affect how one experiences the world. It's easy for me to assume that people are acting in good faith if they do stupid things because I have never had any of those negative experiences. So the same people doing the same action might be interpreted as "stupid fun" by me and as "abuse" by her. "I had to continue living in the residence with this man." That sentence reads weird to me because I assume that SpaceX will not require you to live at any specific house. So based on my experience of the world, it should have been easy for her to move. I can fully understand if she wants that guy to move instead of her giving up the apartment, but then she should say so instead of claiming that it was impossible to move. "Elon Musk’s behavior bears a remarkable similarity to the behavior of a sadistic and abusive man who had previously been part of my life." I do feel sorry for this person, because she clearly had many bad things happen to her, which never happened to me. So maybe that's just me noticing how privileged I am. But if her goal is to push SpaceX towards objectively improving their work environment, I wonder if it would have been better to not mention this. Because like I said in my first comment, this makes it very easy to misinterpret her (probably valid) criticism as a personal vendetta.
- itsdrewmiller 5y ago
  "Intern housing" implies that the specific housing is provided or subsidized by SpaceX. Of course she's not forced to live there, but she would probably have to pay money to move. (And why shouldn't the person who assaulted her be the one to move?) It still doesn't seem to me that you are reading the article in good faith.
  - fxtentacle 5y ago
    She wrote "I had to". You wrote "Of course she's not forced to". So in effect, you highlighted the same odd word choice as me. And in my opinion, "I have to" is very different from "I don't want to for financial reasons" or "I don't want to for fairness reasons". And yes, I was trying to find examples for how this specific article could be misinterpreted in bad faith.
coddle-hark 5y ago
This comes across as a bad faith interpretation of the comment you’re replying to. I read it as providing additional context and a (slightly?) different perspective, not as an attempt at misrepresenting the article to push an agenda.
- dang 5y ago
  A serious response to the article would begin by acknowledging the strongest parts of the complaint.
  - TigeriusKirk 5y ago
    If you actually want this to be how discussion works on this site, you need to make the point much more consistently than you do.
    - HeyLaughingBoy 5y ago
      Seriously? You need to be told that?
    - dang 5y ago
      Consistency is a red herring because it's outright impossible. We can't come close to seeing everything that gets posted here. If you see a post that ought to have had some moderation but hasn't, the likeliest explanation is that we didn't see it. You can help by flagging it or emailing us at hn@ycombinator.com. https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sort=byDate&type=comment&query=likeliest%20by:dang https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sor...
  - simondotau 5y ago
    Establishing the argument is the role of the article being linked to, not a job for every single commenter wishing to express an opinion. A serious response can always criticise the weak parts of any argument without having to guess which parts are considered stronger by others. Or in the alternative, perhaps we should not have any discussion on this topic at all until SpaceX offers a formal response, at which point you can chastise everyone for failing to acknowledge BOTH the strongest parts of this article and the strongest parts of SpaceX's response.