Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Uber Investigating Sexual Harassment Claims by Ex-Employee

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

441–450 of 534 posts

Re: Uber Investigating Sexual Harassment Claims by Ex-Employee

#441

Post by twfarland »

CydeWeys wrote: post #338
hatsunearu wrote: post #308

I just find the whole leather jacket incident incredibly baffling. It's just a few hundred bucks. Is Uber that short of cash? It's ridiculous.

It's only baffling until you realize that it really just is horrible, blatant sexism of the worst kind. That entire department had turned so corrosively sexist (going from 24 to 3% women) that it needed to finish the job and get the rest of the women out by making it plain that they weren't welcome. We're talking about the people in power here being so horribly sexist that they have to force the women out in order to…

It doesn't seem like they're trying to actively force women out. It seems like they're such creeps that no women (or grown men) would want to be there.

Re: Uber Investigating Sexual Harassment Claims by Ex-Employee

#442

Post by jeffdavis »

brudgers wrote: post #352

As I commented last night[1], the New York Times has cast Fowler's experience as a he-said-she-said story. Unfortunately I was not pessimistic enough: 1. The New York Times spiked the most damning part of Fowler's story: that HR was actively involved in supporting the behavior. 2. It down plays Fowler's specific experience as typical for the industry and marginalizes it by bringing Pao's story into Fowler's narrative…

The facts are not in yet; this is a developing story.

We've seen at least a couple big cases where journalists were too quick to take a side, ended up very wrong, and lost a lot of credibility for themselves and future accusers. Restraint is warranted.

That being said, the NYT needs to follow up after the drama dies down, and not just leave the final story as a footnote somewhere.

Re: Uber Investigating Sexual Harassment Claims by Ex-Employee

#443

Post by qntty »

abandonliberty wrote: post #399
qntty wrote: post #395

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Given the risks, her lawyer would advise her to avoid making the details of the case public. You're not Sherlock Holmes. Unless you have years of experience in law, you have no business scrutinizing evidence.

>Given the risks, her lawyer would advise her to avoid making the details of the case public. >>It's not getting released at this stage to strengthen her legal position. Did you miss this statement, or simply fail to comprehend it? > Unless you have years of experience in law, you have no business scrutinizing evidence. I'm glad to hear it. This is a valid option! We should rely on the experts and refrain from making…

>Wait, no, you're just another person who shouts down any views that don't match your own

"Show me evidence" isn't a view

>Enjoy the state of your country; people like you created it.

I quite like Denmark these days.

Re: Uber Investigating Sexual Harassment Claims by Ex-Employee

#444

Post by st3v3r »

Consultant32452 wrote: post #403
st3v3r wrote: post #360

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except telling someone like the OP who clearly is not the kind of person that would believe the victim or try to get any help, and instead launch into a cross examination isn't going to do that. All that's going to do is make the victim feel even worse, and possibly discourage her from getting help or reporting at all.

The fundamental principle of the American justice system is that we should be skeptical of all claims of wrong-doing. The appropriate response to these claims is to ask for evidence and in its absence potentially educate the claimant on how to properly collect evidence. I'm sure there's a lot of legitimate claims out there, and most of them will not result in justice. However, rampant speculation based on Twitter ane…

Except that's for the Justice System. Not normal people. The Justice System can take care of vetting evidence. Normal people are supposed to be supportive and stand up for those who come to them with stories like this one.

And I'm sorry, but if someone comes to you and says that they've experienced the things in this story, and the first thing you do is ask for evidence, then you will be branded a monster, and rightfully so. You are telling that person, "I do not believe you; I think you are a liar." If someone comes to you with a story like this, you provide support to them. You console them. You ask them what you can do to help. You do not cross examine them, and make them feel terrible for coming to you.

Re: Uber Investigating Sexual Harassment Claims by Ex-Employee

#446

Post by acchow »

SeoxyS wrote: post #408
brudgers wrote: post #352

As I commented last night[1], the New York Times has cast Fowler's experience as a he-said-she-said story. Unfortunately I was not pessimistic enough: 1. The New York Times spiked the most damning part of Fowler's story: that HR was actively involved in supporting the behavior. 2. It down plays Fowler's specific experience as typical for the industry and marginalizes it by bringing Pao's story into Fowler's narrative…

NYTimes is a news organization with a mandate to report on verifiable fact, not rumor or opinion. You're complaining that it's reported as a he-said-she-said type of story… but for now, that's exactly what it is. The claims are quite plausible and convincing (and likely true), but at this point they still are merely unsubstantiated claims. If I were to imagine the right way to report such a story at this point, it wo…

I really wish papers could run non-stories along with the usual stories:

"Uber Sexual Harassment Claims Story - In Progress

This story is in progress, and the following are the verified facts:

The following are claims that no media has reliable, verifiable source on yet. If they are reporting on them as fact, you might want to reconsider what media you trust:

We will publish our full story when we the picture is clearer."

As the newspaper of record, it's also helpful to differentiate the reliable and non-reliable media for us.

Re: Uber Investigating Sexual Harassment Claims by Ex-Employee

#447

Post by spangry »

eropple wrote: post #410
theWatcher37 wrote: post #283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What a hateful and oddly specific comment. "I've read your comments" Yeah, ok buddy

He's not wrong. 'hueving's comment history around here pushes an extreme-right-wing viewpoint that is cloaked in just enough civility to make the decent folks I know around here reconsider whether or not it's worth engaging with him. (Many don't, because it's exhausting to be alternative-facted to death.) I wouldn't expect a woman--or anyone--to tell me jack and/or shit if I was comfortable expressing worldviews that…

I really don't see how personal attacks, or attaching pejorative labels to others (conservative, reactionary etc.) enhances your argument. It just makes it seem like you don't have a convincing counter-argument and need to resort to appeals to emotion / preaching to those who already agree with you. If you actually want to convince people who don't share your views, perhaps consider a different tactic.

And there's just something unsettling about going through someone's comment history to better 'target' your irrelevant personal attacks. I think it reveals more about you than it does about the person you're attacking.

Re: Uber Investigating Sexual Harassment Claims by Ex-Employee

#448

Post by mistercow »

qntty wrote: post #395
abandonliberty wrote: post #370

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If she turns out to be lying, things will go very badly for her. Not only will it be difficult for her to find a company willing to hire her, but Uber could sue her for defamation. Exactly. Given the risks, there should be some evidence. Perhaps it's not getting released at this stage to strengthen her legal position. It is popular in the USA right now to silence rational, evidence based discussions. Now more than…

Given the risks, her lawyer would advise her to avoid making the details of the case public. You're not Sherlock Holmes. Unless you have years of experience in law, you have no business scrutinizing evidence.

Wow no. Every rational person should be scrutinizing evidence. Not to do so would be insane. But the evidence here clearly points in her favor.

Re: Uber Investigating Sexual Harassment Claims by Ex-Employee

#449

Post by praneshp »

theWatcher37 wrote: post #283
DanBC wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> (this behavior doesn't match the 6 companies I've worked at) Why do you think women would tell you about their experiences? I've read your comments on HN, and you'd be the last person I'd tell if it had happened to me.

What a hateful and oddly specific comment. "I've read your comments" Yeah, ok buddy

He's not wrong. hueving comes across to me as rude, unwilling to google simple things, and quick to say things like "why should I care about X". I don't want to say things like "If I were a woman I wouldn't tell you about such things", maybe hueving's a great person to talk to in real life.

Re: Uber Investigating Sexual Harassment Claims by Ex-Employee

#450

Post by qntty »

mistercow wrote: post #448
qntty wrote: post #395

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Given the risks, her lawyer would advise her to avoid making the details of the case public. You're not Sherlock Holmes. Unless you have years of experience in law, you have no business scrutinizing evidence.

Wow no. Every rational person should be scrutinizing evidence. Not to do so would be insane. But the evidence here clearly points in her favor.

When was the last time you read a legal brief for fun? "Scrutinizing evidence" here is a technical task done by experts.
Post reply on HN