2 ms·

'despise' is a very strong term. It implies a much much stronger reaction to the material than just disagreeing with it. Why is that? 'it seems to argue that

'despise' is a very strong term. It implies a much much stronger reaction to the material than just disagreeing with it. Why is that? 'it seems to argue that any woman who claims anything should be treated as unequivocal truth, punishment meted out to the harshest extent possible' No it doesn't. It doesn't say anything of the kind.If you take that from the article then you are bringing that position to the material. "Not all women are honest and truthful. Women are not above pettiness, power plays and self-interests." Very true. But it is hard to see how this relates to the real point of the blog. All in all, I detect clear evidence of an angry person, ready to project his resentment at what he believes to be inappropriate powerplays by scheming women. Scary powerplays that are too often blindly supported.

personZ 12y ago
>Why is that? Because it is unfair when someone supports someone, and their position, purely because of their gender. It is despicable behaviour. It is absolutely worth strong emotions. >It doesn't say anything of the kind. It quite clearly lays out a case that Horvath must be in the right, Tom must be in the wrong (and those supporting him will face the wrath of all women who will now not want to deal with them, because of the above), and Github is merely trying to clean their hands of it. Yes, it absolutely says so. All outcomes are only variations of the preceding. >All in all, I detect clear evidence of an angry person Take your white knight act somewhere else. Your particular form of discouraging disagreement is disgusting. No, seriously, it is vile, and is the sort of banal ignorance of people who have nothing interesting to say. It is actually remarkably paternalistic how many take stories like that: She is a woman, so she simply must be the victim. He is a man, so he simply must be the villain. Yet this base assumption goes unstated and simply assumed, as if we're all in agreement. But we aren't, and stating that women are as great as men in all things, including the negatives, is important, because brave knights such as yourself fail to understand this.
- grifpete 12y ago
  The post does not do that. In fact it doesn't lay out a case that Horvath must be in the right at all. What the post actually does, for those who took the time to read it, is point out that a distressing takeaway from the whole messy affair is that without a convincing post mortem (legal or not) that is has a chilling effect on the way women feel about the tech workplace. In other words, the key point is about how such messy events are handled and the impact ths 'handling' has. As for your concern about my concern for your anger. I think your last paragraph speaks for itself. Apparently you don't seem to understand that angry statements about the way women (the unfair beneficiaries of being unthinkingly treated as victims) and men (unfairly branded as villains) just reproduces a stereotyped position that is as laughable as your idea that listing the many negatives of women is doing them a favor.
  - personZ 12y ago
    without a convincing post mortem Where they found no evidence or harassment, sexual or not? For those who are sure that Horvath has been wronged, this outcome will never be convincing. Further it's worth noting that while Horvath can go off slinging whatever accusations she feels like, Github and its employees are all seriously constrained. If they pulled a Tesla and responded openly, they would be attacked for it, guaranteed. This is the best they can do. listing the many negatives of women is doing them a favor I listed the negatives of people, of which women are (to, apparently, your surprise).
    - grifpete 12y ago
      Once again I refer you to the actual blog post. The concern about the post mortem she actually voiced was that the investigation was by an agency paid for by the company. The well known problem with such investigations is that they are rarely seen as being independent and hence, sadly irrespective of their merits of lack of them, they rarely solve the problem because their reports are seen as being tainted. Hence such investigations do not serve to remove the chill she was trying to explain and which you evidently failed to understand. With regard to the apparent imbalance between Horvath and Github and its employees, such an alleged imbalance is fictional. This kind of situation where there is an employee involved in any kind of war of words with a company is indeed rarely balanced but it is rare for it to be truly in favor of the employee. A company has the resources and many means to make its position clear. This starts with engaging a PR / crisis management firm to craft the strategy to be rolled out. It will typically involve and investigation and two classes of public statements. Statements from the company expressing vague regret and apology for any perceived wrong doing. And orchestrated anonymous statements from employees explaining how the situation was more nuanced and how the employee in question was always difficult etc etc. Just to be clear how typical this pattern is, I predicted precisely this rollout weeks ago and it followed the standard pattern precisely. Please note that I do not have any knowledge of the situation and assume nothing about what did or didn't happen. I do however recognize that precisely that uncertainty, if not properly handled after the effect can indeed have a chilling effect. It is for that reason that I believe the original post had merit. Please further note that my concern with your comment is because you mindlessly trot out stereotyped generalities about the unfairness of the ways men and women are treated in the workplace. The same tired old shibboleth's about how women are inevitably considered blameless and right and men villainous perpetrators whatever the facts. As for me being surprised by your insight that women too can have negative sides to their personalities - grow up.

personZ 12y ago

>Why is that? Because it is unfair when someone supports someone, and their position, purely because of their gender. It is despicable behaviour. It is absolutely worth strong emotions. >It doesn't say anything of the kind. It quite clearly lays out a case that Horvath must be in the right, Tom must be in the wrong (and those supporting him will face the wrath of all women who will now not want to deal with them, because of the above), and Github is merely trying to clean their hands of it. Yes, it absolutely says so. All outcomes are only variations of the preceding. >All in all, I detect clear evidence of an angry person Take your white knight act somewhere else. Your particular form of discouraging disagreement is disgusting. No, seriously, it is vile, and is the sort of banal ignorance of people who have nothing interesting to say. It is actually remarkably paternalistic how many take stories like that: She is a woman, so she simply must be the victim. He is a man, so he simply must be the villain. Yet this base assumption goes unstated and simply assumed, as if we're all in agreement. But we aren't, and stating that women are as great as men in all things, including the negatives, is important, because brave knights such as yourself fail to understand this.

grifpete 12y ago
The post does not do that. In fact it doesn't lay out a case that Horvath must be in the right at all. What the post actually does, for those who took the time to read it, is point out that a distressing takeaway from the whole messy affair is that without a convincing post mortem (legal or not) that is has a chilling effect on the way women feel about the tech workplace. In other words, the key point is about how such messy events are handled and the impact ths 'handling' has. As for your concern about my concern for your anger. I think your last paragraph speaks for itself. Apparently you don't seem to understand that angry statements about the way women (the unfair beneficiaries of being unthinkingly treated as victims) and men (unfairly branded as villains) just reproduces a stereotyped position that is as laughable as your idea that listing the many negatives of women is doing them a favor.
- personZ 12y ago
  without a convincing post mortem Where they found no evidence or harassment, sexual or not? For those who are sure that Horvath has been wronged, this outcome will never be convincing. Further it's worth noting that while Horvath can go off slinging whatever accusations she feels like, Github and its employees are all seriously constrained. If they pulled a Tesla and responded openly, they would be attacked for it, guaranteed. This is the best they can do. listing the many negatives of women is doing them a favor I listed the negatives of people, of which women are (to, apparently, your surprise).
  - grifpete 12y ago
    Once again I refer you to the actual blog post. The concern about the post mortem she actually voiced was that the investigation was by an agency paid for by the company. The well known problem with such investigations is that they are rarely seen as being independent and hence, sadly irrespective of their merits of lack of them, they rarely solve the problem because their reports are seen as being tainted. Hence such investigations do not serve to remove the chill she was trying to explain and which you evidently failed to understand. With regard to the apparent imbalance between Horvath and Github and its employees, such an alleged imbalance is fictional. This kind of situation where there is an employee involved in any kind of war of words with a company is indeed rarely balanced but it is rare for it to be truly in favor of the employee. A company has the resources and many means to make its position clear. This starts with engaging a PR / crisis management firm to craft the strategy to be rolled out. It will typically involve and investigation and two classes of public statements. Statements from the company expressing vague regret and apology for any perceived wrong doing. And orchestrated anonymous statements from employees explaining how the situation was more nuanced and how the employee in question was always difficult etc etc. Just to be clear how typical this pattern is, I predicted precisely this rollout weeks ago and it followed the standard pattern precisely. Please note that I do not have any knowledge of the situation and assume nothing about what did or didn't happen. I do however recognize that precisely that uncertainty, if not properly handled after the effect can indeed have a chilling effect. It is for that reason that I believe the original post had merit. Please further note that my concern with your comment is because you mindlessly trot out stereotyped generalities about the unfairness of the ways men and women are treated in the workplace. The same tired old shibboleth's about how women are inevitably considered blameless and right and men villainous perpetrators whatever the facts. As for me being surprised by your insight that women too can have negative sides to their personalities - grow up.