5 ms·

She's just saying Ackman is throwing good money after bad. Don't see how that's arrogant, it's just a good analysis. Based on his history, Sabatini will most

by cjf101 4y ago

She's just saying Ackman is throwing good money after bad. Don't see how that's arrogant, it's just a good analysis. Based on his history, Sabatini will most likely end up costing Ackman time/money/trouble. There are other people that wouldn't come with that risk whose likely research output would be the same or better. I mean, he's welcome to make the investments he wants, but it's a bad look.

epicureanideal 4y ago
Or maybe people can have a second chance, or maybe there are more details that they know about and we don’t. Maybe a talented scientist shouldn’t have the rest of their life thrown away even if they did make a mistake.
- mcguire 4y ago
  When does the "second chance" clock start, the first time you do something heinous or when you get caught? How many "mistakes" (Really? "Mistake"?) does that first chance cover?
  - bilqis 4y ago
    I kinda missed, did this biologist served some time or was he convicted?
    - LarryMullins 4y ago
      Don't you know that accusations are just as good as convictions^? According to some other comments in this discussion, he has been so thoroughly accused that he is now "disgraced" and funding him is "evil". ^ Except of course when they aren't. When they are or aren't depends entirely on the politics of the beholder, and woe unto you if you ever get it wrong.
    - mcguire 4y ago
      https://www.mikeglaw.com/is-sexual-harassment-a-crime/ https://www.mikeglaw.com/is-sexual-harassment-a-crime/
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
- acdha 4y ago
  I'd think a second chance would start with him admitting a mistake rather than suing the victims. It's unlikely to go better if he doesn't want to learn from the past.
  - LarryMullins 4y ago
    He denies any wrongdoing. He was never convicted of anything. How can you be so certain that he has anything to apologize for at all?
    - consumer451 4y ago
      You don't need to break the law to have something for which to apologize for, do you? He apparently broke the rules of his org. He hid his relationship with a student, who now says she was coerced into the relationship. Is that not something that might deserve apology?
    - acdha 4y ago
      Three separate organizations (HHMI, Whitehead, MIT) investigated and concluded he did. He also resigned from MIT rather than having tenure revoked, which also seems like he knew there was at least some merit to the claims. Now, it's possible that one of the lawsuits will reveal some information which discredits those investigations but that's a pretty relatively low probability. Occam's razor suggests that the successful guy in a position of authority took advantage of that stature like so many before him.
      - bsder 4y ago
        All of these institutions have a vested interest in making a PR disaster go away. Resigning says nothing about the truth of the claims as it can be really hard to defend yourself against institutions with bottomless lawyers who are out for your blood. And, if all the testimony is just internal people, they can be pressured quite effectively. To contrast, billionaires assume that they are going to get a return. If they believe that the money is going to all be wasted because the principal is a skirt chasing horndog, they are not going to invest. None of any of this says anything about truth or justice. Things get especially messy when consensual relationships are involved. He was apparently married to a fellow staffer (not a subordinate) and it looks like the breakup is at the center of this. Ever seen what people will do in the middle of a divorce? Too many harassers get away with stuff, but we have also seen people pulled apart by the mob who were innocent. And the innocent need far more protection than they are given right now. And, if the institutions suddenly decide to settle out of court, will we declare that as evidence that they went after the innocent and then send the mob after the institutions, instead? I have yet to see this. Since things seem to be plowing through a court of law, I'll withold becoming part of the mob, thanks.
- vkou 4y ago
  > Or maybe people can have a second chance Second chances for people are great. And the way to get a second chance is to to follow a simple three-step process: 1. Admit guilt. 2. Express remorse. 3. Make amends. So far, he's not reached step 1, he's still in step 0, which is deny everything and threaten everyone around you with lawsuits. That's not quite asking for a second chance.
  - eaurouge 4y ago
    Fine. But who came up with these rules? And why does Ackman have to comply?
    - vkou 4y ago
      > But who came up with these rules? Who came up with second chances? You have a receipt for it? > And why does Ackman have to comply? He doesn't have to do anything, but nobody has to extend him an olive branch, either.
eastWestMath 4y ago
Yeah, it’s spending a lot of money to start a lab that: - will probably be stonewalled out of any collaboration with reputable universities (because his reputation is so toxic), - will have trouble attracting talent (because his reputation is so toxic), - people will be ready to believe any sort of accusation of impropriety coming out of that lab from sexual harassment to more general academic fraud (because his reputation is so toxic).
snapplebobapple 4y ago
This view honestly lacks perspective. Based on his history of scientific achievement Sabatini is likely to make further meaningful breakthroughs that will benefit us all. The difference is that those people with the same or better research output are already employed somewhere outputting research. Of the unemployed pool of labor this guy is likely the cream of the crop and getting him setup and doing research again will likely have a much higher return than incrementing the research budget of any of those already working Biologists. Further, what the hell happened to America? America used to understand how high the benefit of scientific advancement was. Hell, America naturalized actual nazis and shielded them from prosecution in the name of pushing scientific progress not that many decades ago. Now everyone is on board with permanently and utterly derailing a productive academic over some he said she said BS that has not resulted in any actual charges, only civil suits and counter-suits??? Must be nice being so privileged that one can afford to spit in scientific advancement's face.

by cjf101 4y ago

epicureanideal 4y ago

Or maybe people can have a second chance, or maybe there are more details that they know about and we don’t. Maybe a talented scientist shouldn’t have the rest of their life thrown away even if they did make a mistake.

mcguire 4y ago
When does the "second chance" clock start, the first time you do something heinous or when you get caught? How many "mistakes" (Really? "Mistake"?) does that first chance cover?
- bilqis 4y ago
  I kinda missed, did this biologist served some time or was he convicted?
  - LarryMullins 4y ago
    Don't you know that accusations are just as good as convictions^? According to some other comments in this discussion, he has been so thoroughly accused that he is now "disgraced" and funding him is "evil". ^ Except of course when they aren't. When they are or aren't depends entirely on the politics of the beholder, and woe unto you if you ever get it wrong.
  - mcguire 4y ago
    https://www.mikeglaw.com/is-sexual-harassment-a-crime/ https://www.mikeglaw.com/is-sexual-harassment-a-crime/
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
acdha 4y ago
I'd think a second chance would start with him admitting a mistake rather than suing the victims. It's unlikely to go better if he doesn't want to learn from the past.
- LarryMullins 4y ago
  He denies any wrongdoing. He was never convicted of anything. How can you be so certain that he has anything to apologize for at all?
  - consumer451 4y ago
    You don't need to break the law to have something for which to apologize for, do you? He apparently broke the rules of his org. He hid his relationship with a student, who now says she was coerced into the relationship. Is that not something that might deserve apology?
  - acdha 4y ago
    Three separate organizations (HHMI, Whitehead, MIT) investigated and concluded he did. He also resigned from MIT rather than having tenure revoked, which also seems like he knew there was at least some merit to the claims. Now, it's possible that one of the lawsuits will reveal some information which discredits those investigations but that's a pretty relatively low probability. Occam's razor suggests that the successful guy in a position of authority took advantage of that stature like so many before him.
    - bsder 4y ago
      All of these institutions have a vested interest in making a PR disaster go away. Resigning says nothing about the truth of the claims as it can be really hard to defend yourself against institutions with bottomless lawyers who are out for your blood. And, if all the testimony is just internal people, they can be pressured quite effectively. To contrast, billionaires assume that they are going to get a return. If they believe that the money is going to all be wasted because the principal is a skirt chasing horndog, they are not going to invest. None of any of this says anything about truth or justice. Things get especially messy when consensual relationships are involved. He was apparently married to a fellow staffer (not a subordinate) and it looks like the breakup is at the center of this. Ever seen what people will do in the middle of a divorce? Too many harassers get away with stuff, but we have also seen people pulled apart by the mob who were innocent. And the innocent need far more protection than they are given right now. And, if the institutions suddenly decide to settle out of court, will we declare that as evidence that they went after the innocent and then send the mob after the institutions, instead? I have yet to see this. Since things seem to be plowing through a court of law, I'll withold becoming part of the mob, thanks.
vkou 4y ago
> Or maybe people can have a second chance Second chances for people are great. And the way to get a second chance is to to follow a simple three-step process: 1. Admit guilt. 2. Express remorse. 3. Make amends. So far, he's not reached step 1, he's still in step 0, which is deny everything and threaten everyone around you with lawsuits. That's not quite asking for a second chance.
- eaurouge 4y ago
  Fine. But who came up with these rules? And why does Ackman have to comply?
  - vkou 4y ago
    > But who came up with these rules? Who came up with second chances? You have a receipt for it? > And why does Ackman have to comply? He doesn't have to do anything, but nobody has to extend him an olive branch, either.

eastWestMath 4y ago

Yeah, it’s spending a lot of money to start a lab that: - will probably be stonewalled out of any collaboration with reputable universities (because his reputation is so toxic), - will have trouble attracting talent (because his reputation is so toxic), - people will be ready to believe any sort of accusation of impropriety coming out of that lab from sexual harassment to more general academic fraud (because his reputation is so toxic).

snapplebobapple 4y ago

This view honestly lacks perspective. Based on his history of scientific achievement Sabatini is likely to make further meaningful breakthroughs that will benefit us all. The difference is that those people with the same or better research output are already employed somewhere outputting research. Of the unemployed pool of labor this guy is likely the cream of the crop and getting him setup and doing research again will likely have a much higher return than incrementing the research budget of any of those already working Biologists. Further, what the hell happened to America? America used to understand how high the benefit of scientific advancement was. Hell, America naturalized actual nazis and shielded them from prosecution in the name of pushing scientific progress not that many decades ago. Now everyone is on board with permanently and utterly derailing a productive academic over some he said she said BS that has not resulted in any actual charges, only civil suits and counter-suits??? Must be nice being so privileged that one can afford to spit in scientific advancement's face.