4 ms·

I would strongly advise against backing OAPI. The CEO & founder is Randi Harper. Her online persona is quite hostile, and she is often the instigator of online

by chroma 11y ago

I would strongly advise against backing OAPI. The CEO & founder is Randi Harper. Her online persona is quite hostile, and she is often the instigator of online harassment. One of my acquaintances was the target of her ire. Her e-mails and call-outs eventually caused him to seek psychiatric help, including medication. So while I support the goal of OAPI, I think the founding members have attitudes that hurt the cause more than help it. I wish there was an organization I could recommend instead, but so far I haven't found anything. If anyone knows of alternatives, I'm all ears.

deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
anthonyb 11y ago
See points 2 and 5 above: you're part of the problem. In addition, labelling Randi as a "harasser" is a common gamergate tactic.
- throwawayihz 11y ago
  How else would you characterize somebody who doxxes people? https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CI3Z7hwUcAAZs3r.png https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CI3Z7hwUcAAZs3r.png
- chroma 11y ago
  I'm sorry if you think I'm part of the problem, but I don't see how those two points relate to my comment. Heck, I agree with pretty much everything shkyes said. I didn't know labelling Randi Harper a harasser was a gamergate tactic. I know almost nothing about this whole gamergate business. I just visited the OAPI's site and recognized the name Randi Harper from my acquaintance's experience. He had a very rough time because of her emails, Facebook messages, and tweets. For that reason and that reason alone, I voiced my concern. I don't have any other motive. Digging deeper, I see that Harper herself has been on the receiving end of some outright egregious behavior. I can only express my condolences for her and condemnation for her attackers. Still, it seems to me that her organization will likely cause more harm than good in curbing online abuse. One can feel sympathy for another human being while also doubting their fit for a position. But honestly, this whole topic is radioactive. No matter one's opinion or how delicately it is put, it gets misconstrued and pigeonholed. It's impossible to have an honest, nuanced conversation.
  - anthonyb 11y ago
    So, the two parts: 2. Unsubstantiated smears, and categorising her as "hostile". You're using an anonymous "throwaway" account, so there's no evidence whatsoever for your claims. 5. Downplaying the extreme harassment as "egregious behavior". Perhaps you (or anyone reading) might want to go look it up yourself, there's pages and pages of this sort of unbelievably obnoxious drivel: https://twitter.com/search?q=%40freebsdgirl%20%23gamergate&src=typd&vertical=default&f=tweets https://twitter.com/search?q=%40freebsdgirl%20%23gamergate&s... The only reason that Randi created GGAutoblocker and the OAPI was because she was targeted by gamergate. And their tactics are, essentially, what you're doing right now - smear tactics.
    - chroma 11y ago
      Throwaway? My account is over 5 years years old. Please look at my comment history.[1] I'm not a troll or a single-issue commenter. I use a pseudonym because sometimes I want to say things that I believe to be true, but would cause me unnecessary grief if attached to my real name. "Egregious" is downplaying? I used one of the strongest adjectives I could think of. Replace it with synonyms: their behavior is appalling, shocking, atrocious, abhorrent. I do not support them. I think they are terrible people. I cannot condemn them any more strongly than I already have. Please stop insinuating that I'm part of such a despicable group. I'm glad Randi Harper created GGAutoblocker. I support the idea behind OAPI. I just don't think Harper is the right person for the job, as she has said some very not-nice things to someone I know, and it significantly impacted his quality of life. I want the same thing as you: For people to converse without becoming targets of harassment, abuse, threats, or otherwise extremely unpleasant or dangerous communication. That's why I'm voicing my concern about the founder of OAPI. There is no other motive at work. As I said before: No matter one's opinion or how delicately it is put, it gets misconstrued and pigeonholed. It's impossible to have an honest, nuanced conversation. How can I disagree with you any more civilly than I already am? Yet despite such civility, I have to deal with implications that I'm part of an odious group of trolls and psychopaths. 1. https://news.ycombinator.com/threads?id=chroma https://news.ycombinator.com/threads?id=chroma
      - deleted 11y ago

by chroma 11y ago

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]

anthonyb 11y ago

See points 2 and 5 above: you're part of the problem. In addition, labelling Randi as a "harasser" is a common gamergate tactic.

throwawayihz 11y ago
How else would you characterize somebody who doxxes people? https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CI3Z7hwUcAAZs3r.png https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CI3Z7hwUcAAZs3r.png
chroma 11y ago
I'm sorry if you think I'm part of the problem, but I don't see how those two points relate to my comment. Heck, I agree with pretty much everything shkyes said. I didn't know labelling Randi Harper a harasser was a gamergate tactic. I know almost nothing about this whole gamergate business. I just visited the OAPI's site and recognized the name Randi Harper from my acquaintance's experience. He had a very rough time because of her emails, Facebook messages, and tweets. For that reason and that reason alone, I voiced my concern. I don't have any other motive. Digging deeper, I see that Harper herself has been on the receiving end of some outright egregious behavior. I can only express my condolences for her and condemnation for her attackers. Still, it seems to me that her organization will likely cause more harm than good in curbing online abuse. One can feel sympathy for another human being while also doubting their fit for a position. But honestly, this whole topic is radioactive. No matter one's opinion or how delicately it is put, it gets misconstrued and pigeonholed. It's impossible to have an honest, nuanced conversation.
- anthonyb 11y ago
  So, the two parts: 2. Unsubstantiated smears, and categorising her as "hostile". You're using an anonymous "throwaway" account, so there's no evidence whatsoever for your claims. 5. Downplaying the extreme harassment as "egregious behavior". Perhaps you (or anyone reading) might want to go look it up yourself, there's pages and pages of this sort of unbelievably obnoxious drivel: https://twitter.com/search?q=%40freebsdgirl%20%23gamergate&src=typd&vertical=default&f=tweets https://twitter.com/search?q=%40freebsdgirl%20%23gamergate&s... The only reason that Randi created GGAutoblocker and the OAPI was because she was targeted by gamergate. And their tactics are, essentially, what you're doing right now - smear tactics.
  - chroma 11y ago
    Throwaway? My account is over 5 years years old. Please look at my comment history.[1] I'm not a troll or a single-issue commenter. I use a pseudonym because sometimes I want to say things that I believe to be true, but would cause me unnecessary grief if attached to my real name. "Egregious" is downplaying? I used one of the strongest adjectives I could think of. Replace it with synonyms: their behavior is appalling, shocking, atrocious, abhorrent. I do not support them. I think they are terrible people. I cannot condemn them any more strongly than I already have. Please stop insinuating that I'm part of such a despicable group. I'm glad Randi Harper created GGAutoblocker. I support the idea behind OAPI. I just don't think Harper is the right person for the job, as she has said some very not-nice things to someone I know, and it significantly impacted his quality of life. I want the same thing as you: For people to converse without becoming targets of harassment, abuse, threats, or otherwise extremely unpleasant or dangerous communication. That's why I'm voicing my concern about the founder of OAPI. There is no other motive at work. As I said before: No matter one's opinion or how delicately it is put, it gets misconstrued and pigeonholed. It's impossible to have an honest, nuanced conversation. How can I disagree with you any more civilly than I already am? Yet despite such civility, I have to deal with implications that I'm part of an odious group of trolls and psychopaths. 1. https://news.ycombinator.com/threads?id=chroma https://news.ycombinator.com/threads?id=chroma
    - deleted 11y ago