4 ms·

Consider the case where millions of people are convinced, influenced by a swarm of people on twitter, that someone in your company should be fired. Those millio

Consider the case where millions of people are convinced, influenced by a swarm of people on twitter, that someone in your company should be fired. Those millions of people are an impactful portion of your customer base. You can either do what they want you to do or lose a lot of money; perhaps enough to impact the viability/health of your company. At that point, it's not unreasonable to back down and fire the person, regardless of your own opinion on the subject. Sure, you can stand up to it and keep them around; but is it reasonable to risk it? To risk the jobs of the other people are your company? An army isn't powerful because there's one powerful person at the top. An army is powerful because there are many people at the bottom, and they are organized to act as a single force.

lapcat 4y ago
> Consider the case where millions of people are convinced, influenced by a swarm of people on twitter, that someone in your company should be fired. Is this a real case though? It seems like only a counterfactual hypothetical. In most cases, millions of people are not going to feel as strongly about something as the minority of people tweeting. If the people tweeting about it even feel strongly; it's easy to tweet about something, but writing a tweet doesn't necessarily represent a powerful and lasting dedication to a cause. These incidents tend to be fleeting.
- vinyl7 4y ago
  Is it real? Probably not, but that is how organization perceives it. An angry mob on twitter sure does make it look like you'd lose a lot a business by not capitulating, even though chances are 90% of those people probably never were customers in the first place. It doesn't have to be a real threat for it to be perceived as a real threat.
  - lapcat 4y ago
    > even though chances are 90% of those people probably never were customers in the first place. It doesn't have to be a real threat for it to be perceived as a real threat. Shouldn't we blame the people in power for having incompetently bad misperceptions about their own organizations?

lapcat 4y ago

> Consider the case where millions of people are convinced, influenced by a swarm of people on twitter, that someone in your company should be fired. Is this a real case though? It seems like only a counterfactual hypothetical. In most cases, millions of people are not going to feel as strongly about something as the minority of people tweeting. If the people tweeting about it even feel strongly; it's easy to tweet about something, but writing a tweet doesn't necessarily represent a powerful and lasting dedication to a cause. These incidents tend to be fleeting.

vinyl7 4y ago
Is it real? Probably not, but that is how organization perceives it. An angry mob on twitter sure does make it look like you'd lose a lot a business by not capitulating, even though chances are 90% of those people probably never were customers in the first place. It doesn't have to be a real threat for it to be perceived as a real threat.
- lapcat 4y ago
  > even though chances are 90% of those people probably never were customers in the first place. It doesn't have to be a real threat for it to be perceived as a real threat. Shouldn't we blame the people in power for having incompetently bad misperceptions about their own organizations?