3 ms·
> defending them because they’re women There’s absolutely nothing in my comment that even implies I’m defending them and their actions, and also absolutely not
by abadpoli 3y ago
> defending them because they’re women
There’s absolutely nothing in my comment that even implies I’m defending them and their actions, and also absolutely nothing in my comment that implies any of my statement is based on their gender.
I seem to have struck a nerve with you, though. I think the commenter doth protest too much.
- tristor 3y agoI suggest you reread your comment then. You claimed the only reason people questioned their qualifications was sexism.
- Philpax 3y agoThey never said the word "only" or implied it.
- tristor 3y agoThey did not explicitly say it, it was definitely implied, since their entire comment was to claim that is was misogyny and sexism that were the motivations for commenters questioning these board members qualifications. I invite folks to actually look into qualifications of all of the board members, unless it's changed they're on the OpenAI website.
- Philpax 3y ago> I think part of this > There has been a lot of thinly veiled sexism No, they didn't imply it, and they didn't claim it was the primary motivation. They just said it was a contributor. You are perceiving a stronger claim than they made.
- tristor 3y agoIt's literally the only claim they made. There were no alternatives, so of course it's perceived and implied to be the strongest claim. They said what they said, trying to weasel out of it doesn't make the case.
- stevedewald 3y agoYou introduced sex into a discussion where their sex is completely irrelevant.