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

6 Women Accuse Tech VC Justin Caldbeck of Sexual Assault and Harassment

observer.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 484 posts

Re: 6 Women Accuse Tech VC Justin Caldbeck of Sexual Assault and Harassment

#271

Post by 0xcde4c3db »

xenadu02 wrote: post #121
solotronics wrote: post #42

Serious question, does free speech apply in these situations? You have the unalienable right to speak your mind and some people may be offended but that is not illegal. I totally understand if you are employed by someone you can't easily get away if you are made uncomfortable but this is entirely a voluntary situation. Also, if you really think about it making something that makes someone uncomfortable illegal is wei…

The canonical example of the limits of free speech: You can't yell "fire!" in a crowded theater. Similarly, you can't run toward someone screaming, pull back like you're going to throw a punch, then claim innocence when charged with assault. There are numerous court cases that draw various lines. Courts have recognized people sometimes say "I'll kill you" but without any actual intent. They also recognize sometimes t…

> The canonical example of the limits of free speech: You can't yell "fire!" in a crowded theater.

That's the iconic example, but from what I've heard (IANAL) lawyers and judges mostly don't consider it an especially compelling rhetorical argument, let alone representative of an actual legal standard.

Re: 6 Women Accuse Tech VC Justin Caldbeck of Sexual Assault and Harassment

#272

Post by avaer »

jmcgough wrote: post #32

Really glad to see people like this getting called out. Dealing with sexual harassment/assault from someone in power is the last thing you want as a female founder - you have a million other things you need to do to keep your startup afloat, and you don't want to rock the boat if it affects your likelihood of being funded. Feels like the valley is slowly but surely changing. And yes, I recognize that this hasn't been…

> And yes, I recognize that this hasn't been "proven", but really what's the chance [...] Occams razor is that he's at the very least doing something that's inappropriate.

Occam's razor is a tool to winnow down proven scientific theories, not to bypass the need for evidence. I'd rather vest power in the courts than outrage media.

Re: 6 Women Accuse Tech VC Justin Caldbeck of Sexual Assault and Harassment

#273

Post by tootie »

philip1209 wrote: post #216

Reid Hoffman wrote an essay prompted by this, calling for building an "industry-wide HR function" for VC: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/human-rights-women-entreprene...

Is that like some sort of corporate police? That's actually not a bad idea. Like every sort of harassment claim goes to an independent agency to be evaluated and investigated. Any business who wants credibility with their employees pays some dues to that agency and agrees to abide their decisions.

Re: 6 Women Accuse Tech VC Justin Caldbeck of Sexual Assault and Harassment

#274

Post by tomlock »

braveo wrote: post #257
jsmthrowaway wrote: post #253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is sufficient to qualify here, unfortunately.

and now dang is going to harass him in an attempt to get him off the site. Dang doesn't appreciate being called out for his bullshit.

>It makes those of us who are a bit more moderate start to distrust everything we hear in terms of these loaded words. I've said this many times, but when you start using these words for every little thing, you do a disservice to those who are ACTUALLY being sexually harassed, raped, etc.

>and now dang is going to harass him in an attempt to get him off the site.

lol

Re: 6 Women Accuse Tech VC Justin Caldbeck of Sexual Assault and Harassment

#275

Post by dgacmu »

sillysaurus3 wrote: post #140
dragonwriter wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Do you think it's reasonable to destroy his reputation before an investigation has occurred? I think people should be conscious of the uncertainty in the facts when commenting based on limited information, but that he is entitled to no more deference from private actors than, essentially, avoiding libelous statements (those known to be false or made with with reckless disregard for truth.) General private commentar…

Your response changed my mind on the matter, so thank you. It's especially relevant given how all of this played out. (See the other thread https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14621765 and subsequent admission https://www.axios.com/justin-caldbeck-takes-indefinite-leave... ) Any ideas for recognizing situations where a bit of skepticism is warranted vs situations like this? In this case, I'm a little saddened that m…

Since you're asking seriously, I have a hypothesis that probably applies to a lot of the well-meaning skeptical responses in this thread:

Most of the men replying in this thread have an incorrect "prior" (in the statistical sense) of the odds that a woman will experience serious sexual harassment in the workplace. This prior emerges, one presumes, because we look at ourselves as the model for estimating that behavior, think "there's no way in hell I'd behave that way, so this must be really rare", and assign a relatively low probability to the occurrence.

That prior is incorrect. There are enough harassers out there, each of whom harms multiple people, that, in fact, the average experience is of having been inappropriately approached, harassed, or outright assaulted, to the point where [1] a woman has a lifetime 1 in 6 chance of being the victim of rape or attempted rape, and in one survey, 1 in 3 women reported having experienced workplace sexual harassment. [2] Those numbers may be wrong a bit in either direction, but the decimal point is probably in the right place.

When we hear a claim like "X was sexually harassed by Y", we evaluate the likelihood of that statement in light of our own experience and prior - and assign to it a much lower likelihood of it being true than the true probability. In other words, you mentally calculate: P(harassed | X says harassed). By bayes rule, that's equal to P(X says harassed | harassed) * P(harassed) / P(X says harassed). So when our mental model of P(harassed) is too low, our estimate of P(harassed | X says harassed) is too low. And thus arises excessive disbelief in claims that are more likely to be true.

So, my very geeky suggestion for this is: Be very precise about the question you're asking about and the assumptions that go into it. You can often find a way to validate those assumptions to check what you're asking about.

[1] https://www.rainn.org/statistics/victims-sexual-violence [2] http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/02/19/1-in-3-women-sexual...

Re: 6 Women Accuse Tech VC Justin Caldbeck of Sexual Assault and Harassment

#276

Post by ithinkinstereo »

handedness wrote: post #251
ithinkinstereo wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I see your points about false accusations, but how many false accusations cases involve multiple accusers spanning back years?

I don't know, nor do I need to. That's the point. Serious accusations need to be tried in a manner that involves evidence, sworn testimony, counsel, etc., precisely because of their seriousness. In the meantime, online conjecture by parties with no standing should probably presume innocence until guilt is found, because a mob mentality should be beneath us. I know someone who was falsely accused of something serious–…

> What's happening in this thread isn't about self-interest, it's about self-satisfaction. That's neither useful nor wise.

You're making a reasonable, but I would argue, pedantic argument (as it applies to this situation). Caldbeck is not being tried in a court of law, but in the court of public opinion. The standards are looser, that's just a part of living in a community with others, there is a natural bit of self-policing. It's part of our instinctual nature as humans; we pattern-match, it can get us in trouble at times, but it's gotten us this far as a species.

If he is innocent he is free to defend himself and provide counter-evidence. He is being rightfully pilloried given the many claims, over a long period of time, against him. The abundance of evidence, must be considered.

Look at the Bill Cosby case. Legally, innocent, but would you leave your daughter, wife, mother alone with someone with this kind of reputation?

Re: 6 Women Accuse Tech VC Justin Caldbeck of Sexual Assault and Harassment

#277

Post by dragonwriter »

handedness wrote: post #242
dragonwriter wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> this is why we have a legal system on which our society is founded. No, we do not. Our society is not founded on the legal system; the legal system is one feature of our society, intended to deal with the most serious failures of normal operations.

You're arguing a point that's irrelevant to my conclusion, but it's difficult to see the rule of law as anything other than part of our foundation. Remove it and a whole lot of things stop working in a hurry.

The idea of the rule of law is arguably foundational; the actual legal system is not. More to the point, the rules that limit the government within the legal system are not foundational rules of society setting out limits on private interaction (they are, in some cases, foundational in that they express the ways in which government, including the legal system, is subordinated to the people rather than vice versa, but applying the rules of the legal system to private interaction inverts that foundational concept.)

Re: 6 Women Accuse Tech VC Justin Caldbeck of Sexual Assault and Harassment

#278

Post by rhizome »

btilly wrote: post #90
vkou wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's hard not to notice that the claim of sexual harassment is as equally damaging now as being called a communist was in the 50's. It's obviously quite different, but the damage is identical. And when it comes to something so powerful, we should at least respect due process. It's not, and it's not. Communist witch-hunts were conducted by secret, back-channel, anonymous snitches, and were all about guilt by associa…

You don't appear to know the history as well as you think you do. The comparison is fair. Communist witch-hunts were conducted by secret, back-channel, anonymous snitches, and were all about guilt by association. Accusations of sexual harassment put the accuser incredibly out in the open. It was both. A lot of accusations were made in front of the House Un-American Activities Committee, on public record, and those ac…

>Can you provide stories of accused communists starving to death due to the blacklist?

They were more likely to commit suicide for lack of work. See: Philip Loeb and Bartley Crum, for two.

Re: 6 Women Accuse Tech VC Justin Caldbeck of Sexual Assault and Harassment

#279

Post by rmartelli »

warcher wrote: post #157
sillysaurus3 wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, I don't. But do you think it's reasonable to crucify him before any investigation happens? My comment was a bit too female-focused. It wasn't about she-said's or a female conspiracy, but rather the ease of getting people to smear someone that has enemies. It's hard not to notice that the claim of sexual harassment is as equally damaging now as being called a communist was in the 50's. It's obviously quite differe…

If the sea change we observe as a result of these allegations is VC's and tech executives being scrupulously professional in their interactions with female founders and employees, to prevent even a whiff of impropriety, I think we'd all be better off. If this guy could say "I was never even alone in the same conference room with any of these women, let alone at a bar where any impropriety is a matter of their word ag…

If you do that, they will call you sexist and that your behavior is a way to keep women from power.

For example see Mike Pence: “In 2002, Mike Pence told The Hill that he never eats alone with a woman other than his wife and that he won’t attend events featuring alcohol without her by his side, either.”

http://www.newyorker.com/culture/jia-tolentino/mike-pences-m...

Re: 6 Women Accuse Tech VC Justin Caldbeck of Sexual Assault and Harassment

#280

Post by zabana »

At the risk of sounding like I'm defending the guy (which I'm not), do we have a comprehensive definition of "Sexual Assault and Harassement" ? Because in some places (northern europe for example) these terms have very volatile definitions which allows pretty much anything to fall under the "rape" category. I totally understand that repeatedly violating somebody's physical safe space is a form a sexual assault (grabbing someone's butt etc) but I'm not sure if bad jokes and misplaced remarks (however annoying) qualify as such. (Not trying to start a war here, I'm geniunly asking).
Post reply on HN