4 ms·

The claims were verified after the damage was done. My point is that at the time she decided to take this photo (seemingly just after she overheard the stateme

by ratat 14y ago

The claims were verified after the damage was done. My point is that at the time she decided to take this photo (seemingly just after she overheard the statement) the claims were unverified. Had they not been able to verify the claims then it would have been too late.

jasonlotito 14y ago
> Had they not been able to verify the claims then it would have been too late. This is besides the point, as the claims were verified. But, I believe you are wrong. I think if she was found to be lying, the backlash would have been on here. Heck, her claims were verified, and their is still a much strong backlash from the community toward her and SendGrid. I agree. Crying wolf is should not be encouraged. But many times before, people here on HN and elsewhere tell women time and time again to speak up when something happens. Now, when one of them does, she's essentially told to keep quiet and handle it behind the scenes.
- ratat 14y ago
  >I think if she was found to be lying, the backlash would have been on here. I believe you are wrong. The majority reponse would have been that she was telling the truth and nobody else overheard it.
  - jasonlotito 14y ago
    Whereas that's it's been confirmed, there is a backlash against her. So, the key is: make the accusation and don't prove it.
- camelite 14y ago
  No, she's being to to speak up AND handle it behind the scenes. At what point in this conversation did you forget the fact that an identifiable picture was posted publicly to her 9000 followers?
  - jasonlotito 14y ago
    > At what point in this conversation did you forget the fact that an identifiable picture was posted publicly to her 9000 followers? Never, and so what? This happens all the time at public events. Hell, the HN is generally in strong support of laws that uphold such a thing. Apparently, just when it happens to other people. > No, she's being to to speak up AND handle it behind the scenes. Going to address this here. Unfortunately, this isn't as easy as it sounds. It's easy to say report it, but when put into that situation, it's not always as easy to speak up. This is a very well known phenomenon. That she didn't follow the reporting procedure to a T is forgivable, just as what the guy did was forgivable.
    - camelite 14y ago
      Right, my personal belief from the various accounts is that what happened was so innocuous as to not warrant any reaction. I'll freely admit I'm reading between the lines and extrapolating. If it did warrant a reaction I don't think there was any onus on her to literally speak up ('hey cut that st out!') and I'd have no problem if she had simply informed staff and allowed them to handle it, followed by an anonymised account. However what she did by tweeting a publicly identifiable picture and following it up with further calumny on her blog is absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with the reporting procedure, which it appears she did actually follow in addition to going public. Why does she deserve forgiveness when her first public statements compounded her error and she has yet to apologise or express remorse?

by ratat 14y ago

jasonlotito 14y ago

> Had they not been able to verify the claims then it would have been too late. This is besides the point, as the claims were verified. But, I believe you are wrong. I think if she was found to be lying, the backlash would have been on here. Heck, her claims were verified, and their is still a much strong backlash from the community toward her and SendGrid. I agree. Crying wolf is should not be encouraged. But many times before, people here on HN and elsewhere tell women time and time again to speak up when something happens. Now, when one of them does, she's essentially told to keep quiet and handle it behind the scenes.

ratat 14y ago
>I think if she was found to be lying, the backlash would have been on here. I believe you are wrong. The majority reponse would have been that she was telling the truth and nobody else overheard it.
- jasonlotito 14y ago
  Whereas that's it's been confirmed, there is a backlash against her. So, the key is: make the accusation and don't prove it.
camelite 14y ago
No, she's being to to speak up AND handle it behind the scenes. At what point in this conversation did you forget the fact that an identifiable picture was posted publicly to her 9000 followers?
- jasonlotito 14y ago
  > At what point in this conversation did you forget the fact that an identifiable picture was posted publicly to her 9000 followers? Never, and so what? This happens all the time at public events. Hell, the HN is generally in strong support of laws that uphold such a thing. Apparently, just when it happens to other people. > No, she's being to to speak up AND handle it behind the scenes. Going to address this here. Unfortunately, this isn't as easy as it sounds. It's easy to say report it, but when put into that situation, it's not always as easy to speak up. This is a very well known phenomenon. That she didn't follow the reporting procedure to a T is forgivable, just as what the guy did was forgivable.
  - camelite 14y ago
    Right, my personal belief from the various accounts is that what happened was so innocuous as to not warrant any reaction. I'll freely admit I'm reading between the lines and extrapolating. If it did warrant a reaction I don't think there was any onus on her to literally speak up ('hey cut that st out!') and I'd have no problem if she had simply informed staff and allowed them to handle it, followed by an anonymised account. However what she did by tweeting a publicly identifiable picture and following it up with further calumny on her blog is absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with the reporting procedure, which it appears she did actually follow in addition to going public. Why does she deserve forgiveness when her first public statements compounded her error and she has yet to apologise or express remorse?