3 ms·

> Just imagine a conversation between two sorority sisters or two fraternity brothers. They can have some pretty horrible things they say about other people --i

> Just imagine a conversation between two sorority sisters or two fraternity brothers. They can have some pretty horrible things they say about other people --it's quite disgusting; I've overheard them. Would it be fair to bring those conversations up later in life, or as they're being considered for a job? should those conversations be "wrong"? I think it's fair to judge the conversants to the extent you think it provides information about their current character. If it was a conversation years ago, well people change. If someone can't keep themselves from maliciously gossiping a week ago, then I might be reluctant to work with them. N.B. I'm solely responding to your hypothetical here, rather than the uber situation, for I don't think your analogy fits well.

mc32 12y ago
It may or may, not, I think. The reason I say that is that in some specific social situations it's expected/acceptable to say some outrageous things which the speaker(s) do(es)n't actually believe in. It's part of people's bonding 'rituals'. When you're with your friend(s) you may say something which if published could put you in bad light. If that were not the case, I'd be afraid that university campuses or company water-coolers are overrun by psychopaths. We cannot take people literally at all occasions. I'm afraid I cannot trust people who have an interest (whether it be page views or even a social cause, etc.) to discern the situation in a disinterested way. The dynamics are too complicated. Unfortunately it ends up being a situation where we have multiple interpretations of something. For example, I might say "I'm very happy for you" to someone, they may retort "no, you are not, you are just saying that". Who's right?