3 ms·
At the time, that comment could easily be read as angry and irrational, posted by someone who hates on success or simply enjoys trolling. In retrospect, it’s qu
by divbzero 5y ago
At the time, that comment could easily be read as angry and irrational, posted by someone who hates on success or simply enjoys trolling. In retrospect, it’s quite possible medman77 had inside knowledge of the company.
It’s interesting to compare that against a different comment [1] made the following summer from someone with inside knowledge of the field but not of the company.
[1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7951861 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7951861
- encryptluks2 5y agoYou really don't need insider knowledge to make an assessment like that. You just have to learn what you look for when it comes to BS and be prepared to get some negative karma points for calling out companies due to the multiple social media PR companies they employ that use various reputation defense techniques.
- hitekker 5y agoBy "easily", you mean "lazily". It's one thing to assume the comment is irrational, it's another thing, and even lazier thing, to assume that the commenter hates on success or enjoys trolling. It must be uncomfortable to see that our community was fooled. But blaming a whistleblower isn't the right coping strategy.
- throwawaylinux 5y agoThat time was possibly the peak for using baseless accusations of sexism to counter any criticism of women, at least in the online reddit/twitter/facebook/etc sphere. The old HN threads even have some. I feel people have been gradually getting slightly braver in standing up to this.
- tsol 5y agoJust because you're angry and irrational, doesn't mean that you're wrong. In fact one could argue being the only one to see the scam might itself make a lot of people angry