5 ms·

> women want to be equal, but they want to keep certain privileges. What privilege is this that she wants to keep? Women are already bombarded with sex jokes.

by ceol 14y ago

> women want to be equal, but they want to keep certain privileges. What privilege is this that she wants to keep? Women are already bombarded with sex jokes. The fact it's such an outrage she spoke up is testament to that.

amw 14y ago
> What privilege is this that she wants to keep? Women are already bombarded with sex jokes. The fact it's such an outrage she spoke up is testament to that. This times three million.
- deleted 14y ago
  [deleted]
keli 14y ago
it's not an outrage she spoke up. she overheard an inappropriate comment and proceeded to publicly drag these guys' reputations through the mud. between the two actions (private, inappropriate comments in a public space, or calling out the pitchforks), her action was clearly worse, and in real terms more damaging.
- ceol 14y ago
  She didn't drag their reputations through anything, because I don't believe they were named. She only asked the PyCon organizers to do something about them via Twitter.
  - jimminy 14y ago
    She did post a picture of them, wearing their companies t-shirt, resulting in one of the individuals to be released from his job.
    - ceol 14y ago
      I'm still not seeing the part where their reputations were publicly dragged through the mud. To do that, you would have to identify them, and the only people who know them are the ones who paid for their trip in order to represent them: their employers. It's a shame he got fired, but I don't necessarily blame his company. I wouldn't want someone telling dick jokes and making me look bad doing it on my dime.
      - codygman 14y ago
        A name isn't the only form of identification, which is proven by one of the guys getting fired.
        ceol 14y ago
        I know. That's why I mentioned their employers in my previous comment. That still doesn't mean she publicly dragged them through the mud. She didn't release a pastebin full of their information. She never even mentioned their name.
        mnicole 14y ago
        She didn't mention their names because she didn't have to; she deliberately took the photo to show the names on their badges and specifically (even saying so in her blog post, which actually acts to incriminate her more than it does to justify her actions) because one of them was a sponsor and she wanted to get that fact on file. She set out to humiliate these men in front of her thousands of followers and make a mockery of them and their behavior. Neither of them had the means to even begin to refute her claims before they were burned at the stake, and this guy lost his job before most of us even knew this happened. That is the very definition of dragging someone's reputation through the mud.
      - healsdata 14y ago
        How many Alex's work at PlayHaven? Because both of those things are clearly visible in the photo she posted. According to LinkedIn, it's a company of 11-50 people and it took me one minute to find their profiles.
katbyte 14y ago
There isn't an outrage because she spoke up, there's an outrage because she publicly identified and shamed them over something so minor. It should have gone no further then her contacting the event staff and how they resolved it
- ceol 14y ago
  So, I'm wondering what world you all live in where posting a photograph of someone with no name or identity attached is "publicly shaming" them.
  - katbyte 14y ago
    well i could be a smart ass and say a world with face recognition & the internets. Or just point out that in the photo https://twitter.com/adriarichards/status/313417655879102464/photo/1 https://twitter.com/adriarichards/status/313417655879102464/... you can clearly see both their badges (with names) and their are wearing their companies t-shirt. Also she really should have cropped it because the poor man on the left is going to be mistaken for the one of them now.
    - ceol 14y ago
      "Alex" something? I can't read that. And I think their company might have more than one bearded guy on staff, so it's hardly obvious.
      - anigbrowl 14y ago
        Yeah, but I can, and I found him in 30 seconds. And that's the guy who was not fired, and who may not have anything to apologize for. As best I can tell it was the person sitting to his left that lost his job. It's disingenuous to dismiss photos as anonymous when it's so easy to either crowdsource or reverse-engineer someone's identity. If you weren't aware of how easy it is, then I politely suggest you're a little naive.
        14y ago

by ceol 14y ago

amw 14y ago

> What privilege is this that she wants to keep? Women are already bombarded with sex jokes. The fact it's such an outrage she spoke up is testament to that. This times three million.

deleted 14y ago
[deleted]

keli 14y ago

it's not an outrage she spoke up. she overheard an inappropriate comment and proceeded to publicly drag these guys' reputations through the mud. between the two actions (private, inappropriate comments in a public space, or calling out the pitchforks), her action was clearly worse, and in real terms more damaging.

ceol 14y ago
She didn't drag their reputations through anything, because I don't believe they were named. She only asked the PyCon organizers to do something about them via Twitter.
- jimminy 14y ago
  She did post a picture of them, wearing their companies t-shirt, resulting in one of the individuals to be released from his job.
  - ceol 14y ago
    I'm still not seeing the part where their reputations were publicly dragged through the mud. To do that, you would have to identify them, and the only people who know them are the ones who paid for their trip in order to represent them: their employers. It's a shame he got fired, but I don't necessarily blame his company. I wouldn't want someone telling dick jokes and making me look bad doing it on my dime.
    - codygman 14y ago
      A name isn't the only form of identification, which is proven by one of the guys getting fired.
      - ceol 14y ago
        I know. That's why I mentioned their employers in my previous comment. That still doesn't mean she publicly dragged them through the mud. She didn't release a pastebin full of their information. She never even mentioned their name.
        mnicole 14y ago
        She didn't mention their names because she didn't have to; she deliberately took the photo to show the names on their badges and specifically (even saying so in her blog post, which actually acts to incriminate her more than it does to justify her actions) because one of them was a sponsor and she wanted to get that fact on file. She set out to humiliate these men in front of her thousands of followers and make a mockery of them and their behavior. Neither of them had the means to even begin to refute her claims before they were burned at the stake, and this guy lost his job before most of us even knew this happened. That is the very definition of dragging someone's reputation through the mud.
    - healsdata 14y ago
      How many Alex's work at PlayHaven? Because both of those things are clearly visible in the photo she posted. According to LinkedIn, it's a company of 11-50 people and it took me one minute to find their profiles.

katbyte 14y ago

There isn't an outrage because she spoke up, there's an outrage because she publicly identified and shamed them over something so minor. It should have gone no further then her contacting the event staff and how they resolved it

ceol 14y ago
So, I'm wondering what world you all live in where posting a photograph of someone with no name or identity attached is "publicly shaming" them.
- katbyte 14y ago
  well i could be a smart ass and say a world with face recognition & the internets. Or just point out that in the photo https://twitter.com/adriarichards/status/313417655879102464/photo/1 https://twitter.com/adriarichards/status/313417655879102464/... you can clearly see both their badges (with names) and their are wearing their companies t-shirt. Also she really should have cropped it because the poor man on the left is going to be mistaken for the one of them now.
  - ceol 14y ago
    "Alex" something? I can't read that. And I think their company might have more than one bearded guy on staff, so it's hardly obvious.
    - anigbrowl 14y ago
      Yeah, but I can, and I found him in 30 seconds. And that's the guy who was not fired, and who may not have anything to apologize for. As best I can tell it was the person sitting to his left that lost his job. It's disingenuous to dismiss photos as anonymous when it's so easy to either crowdsource or reverse-engineer someone's identity. If you weren't aware of how easy it is, then I politely suggest you're a little naive.
      - 14y ago