6 ms·
This seems like an agitator trying to raise a fuss, not a "whistleblower" (I guess maybe that's how the term is used now). I'd encourage people to read the surr
by version_five 5y ago
This seems like an agitator trying to raise a fuss, not a "whistleblower" (I guess maybe that's how the term is used now). I'd encourage people to read the surrounding tweets, he looks like someone who wants to be outraged about something more than a brave soul calling out some malfeasance.
That aside, if this money is for facilitating sessions, as another comment implies, it is perfectly reasonable. The facilitator has to prepare, follow up, etc. and is presenting to a group. I've done these kind of sessions and that rate is not high. The per hour of facilitation time is a meaningless way to look at it. For all I know, maybe there is something untoward going on, but the usual racial outrage we see in the tweets, and the inflammatory, clickbait headline certainly dont make any kind of case
- leereeves 5y agoEven if the rate is reasonable, what's the justification for involving the police?
- hansvm 5y agoThe stated reason was doxxing.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- leereeves 5y agoHe didn't doxx her before the threat was made. Doxxing means revealing private personal information, but the contract (paid with government funds) that he shared is public record and thus not private by definition. He may have doxxed her by revealing her email address but that happened after the threat.
- ahahahahah 5y agoThat's not really correct. Generally someone's address is considered public information and yet sharing it on a site like Twitter is still considered doxxing. In fact, most doxxing happens using publicly available data.
- KerrAvon 5y agoIt doesn’t matter why he did it. The key words are “he may have doxxed her.”
- whimsicalism 5y agoSure, except for the fact that he didn't, and none of that information is non-public.
- jansen555 5y ago
- dragonwriter 5y agoThe specific communication about “police and lawyers“ refers to that as a response to online publication of private information. For criminal law enforcement, the most likely applicable law at issue would seem to be California's cyber harassment law.
- leereeves 5y agoI don't see how his original tweet [1] could possibly be considered harassment. Libel, perhaps, if untrue, but that's a civil matter, not something that police would handle. 1: https://twitter.com/minilek/status/1509678967472549889 https://twitter.com/minilek/status/1509678967472549889
- dragonwriter 5y agoCalifornia’s indirect cyber harassment law (Penal Code § 653.2) prohibits nonconsensual electronic publication of personally identifying information “for the purpose of imminently causing that other person unwanted physical contact, injury, or harassment, by a third party“ when the information published would be likely to produce or incite the unlawful act that is it's purpose. It's basically an anti-malicious-doxxing law.
- leereeves 5y agoNone of his tweets call for "unwanted physical contact, injury, or harassment". Whatever the likely effect of exposing this deal, the government cannot be allowed to suppress reporting it simply because it is outrageous enough to cause angry responses. That's perverse. If public outrage over "alarmingly lucrative" government contracts is prosecuted as harassment, we're lost.
- dragonwriter 5y ago> Nothing in his message calls for "unwanted physical contact, injury, or harassment". The law does not require a call for those things, it requires a purpose and likelihood of inciting them. Both intent and likelihood of effect are things that are routinely found (in criminal law generally) without an explicit call.
- sgdjgkeirj 5y agoProf Nelson didn’t call himself “whistleblower “ but it does seem untoward that the main author of the California math framework is also making $5000/hour when the client is not a tech company but a public school district with mostly minority and economically disadvantaged students. In any case, if there is nothing untoward, why threaten him with “police and lawyers”?
- HarryHirsch 5y agoLet's have this again, Prof Nelson is siccing his Twitter mob on a person doing her job - no matter what we think about the honorarium, Prof Boaler's job is math didactics for disadvantaged populations. That's not "nothing untoward".
- spoonjim 5y agoNobody’s job is to make Californian kids stupider. She is personally profiting by her destruction of math education for untold numbers of kids.
- HarryHirsch 5y agoYou don't send a Twitter mob after people, full stop, even if they work at schools of education.
- spoonjim 5y agoYou don’t criticize people in a public forum for doing harmful things to society?
- oneepic 5y agoCould you provide some examples to back up that "destruction of math education" claim?
- spoonjim 5y agoThey are trying to “close the achievement gap” by limiting achievement. It’s a crime against humanity of a different kind. https://www.nytimes.com/2021/11/04/us/california-math-curriculum-guidelines.html https://www.nytimes.com/2021/11/04/us/california-math-curric...
- whimsicalism 5y agoI have had Prof. Nelson as a teacher multiple times... labeling him as an "agitator" is ridiculous, he is just a person sharing his opinion on an issue. He is also a commited educator who has organized multiple programs teaching K-12 codijg and mathematics.