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

Lawsuit: Sexual harassment ‘victim’ was San Francisco business rival in disguise

mercurynews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 359 posts

Re: Lawsuit: Sexual harassment ‘victim’ was San Francisco business rival in disguise

#191

Post by TeMPOraL »

microcolonel wrote: post #28
mbesto wrote: post #16

That's right, no one would ever abuse an online system for blacklisting VCs accused of sexual harassment...smh https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14773434

Yeah, they're basically industrial-scale defamation without recourse, trial, or evidence. From a game-theoretic perspective, you would be wrong not to take advantage of it to burn your competitors. If it hasn't dawned on you, this is a political strategy, not a tool for the downtrodden. I have quite literally heard people talking about these things as "the way we'll close the gender participation gap", as in, they'll…

> If it hasn't dawned on you, this is a political strategy, not a tool for the downtrodden.

Also something that occurred to me - if I was an SJW, I'd encourage "guilty until proven innocent" mob reactions against sexual harassment accusations by women to create a powerful leverage for them - the ability to threaten someone with an accusation.

Re: Lawsuit: Sexual harassment ‘victim’ was San Francisco business rival in disguise

#192

Post by bitL »

Ugh, now I am starting to understand those men that are dropping out of society - one such a claim and they are done; it must be dire if they decided it's better to minimize risk and segregate from society... We all are probably going to wear mini cameras/mics and record every single moment of our lives for protection, and won't trust a single human being. Scary...

Re: Lawsuit: Sexual harassment ‘victim’ was San Francisco business rival in disguise

#193

Post by [deleted] »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #178
notgood wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

False accusations are the ones proven to be false; and not every single one that couldn't be confirmed by court or by a jury.

Which suggests an obvious course of action: - true accusation - punish the perpetrator - false accusation - punish the accuser - unable to confirm either way - nothing happens I still don't understand why some people have so much trouble with this concept and want to bias towards "guilty until proven innocent" thinking. And yes, I know that in civil cases in the US, it's "preponderance of the evidence" and not "presu…

[deleted]

Re: Lawsuit: Sexual harassment ‘victim’ was San Francisco business rival in disguise

#194

Post by bluesign »

koolba wrote: post #171
amag wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In Sweden we had a minister of justice a couple of years ago who thought it would be a good idea that persons suspected of buying sexual services (which is illegal in Sweden) got their court order sent in a special large purple envelope. The purpose was that they would then be both publicly shamed (by the mailman, neighbors and what not) as well as would be less able to conceal it from their spouse.

How much is postage in Sweden? If that was implemented and postage is cheap, I can think of some very cost effective practical jokes.

I was just thinking minister of justice receiving a lot of purple envelopes :)

Re: Lawsuit: Sexual harassment ‘victim’ was San Francisco business rival in disguise

#195

Post by adekok »

peteretep wrote: post #138
mcappleton wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

False accusations should be punished with the same penalty as the accuser tried to put upon the innocent. Until that happens, people will see no reason to stop false accusations that they think will help them.

This has the side-effect that real victims are put off from filing charges, which is generally thought to be not a good thing.

So we shouldn't prosecute insurance fraud, because it will put off people who file real claims?

Nonsense.

Corrupting the justice system should be punished to the fullest extent of the law. How can you have justice when the justice system goes along willingly with abuse?

There are cases where claimants are proven beyond any doubt to have lied. Lied knowingly, egregiously, and with malice aforethought. The idea that those people should be let off with a polite smile of "we don't want to put off the real victims" is horrific.

Re: Lawsuit: Sexual harassment ‘victim’ was San Francisco business rival in disguise

#196

Post by gkya »

jlebrech wrote: post #133
wand3r wrote: post #36

This world is getting so fucked up. We can't crucify people for "hitting on" or other somewhat tame behavior because we have nothing left to throw at the real offenders. Conversely, people benefit on both sides of the equation; using sex to their advantage or weaponizing allegations like this. Sexual assualt is REAL and should be punished. We need to focus on a balance between being human and being a predator. People…

clearly sexual harassment is continued advances, one rejected advance shouldn't be considered harassment, but it would make a working relationship awkward. so it's best to not do it anyway. but also if merely (awkwardly trying) being nice is considered harassment bosses will be less willing to hire (attractive) women.

Well it depends on the advance itself, no? It's quite a way from "You look really nice today" to groping.

Re: Lawsuit: Sexual harassment ‘victim’ was San Francisco business rival in disguise

#197

Post by adekok »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #178
notgood wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

False accusations are the ones proven to be false; and not every single one that couldn't be confirmed by court or by a jury.

Which suggests an obvious course of action: - true accusation - punish the perpetrator - false accusation - punish the accuser - unable to confirm either way - nothing happens I still don't understand why some people have so much trouble with this concept and want to bias towards "guilty until proven innocent" thinking. And yes, I know that in civil cases in the US, it's "preponderance of the evidence" and not "presu…

> I still don't understand why some people have so much trouble with this concept and want to bias towards "guilty until proven innocent" thinking.

Witch hunts are exciting. It's also empowering to believe that you're one of the "good guys", going after those dastardly "bad guys".

TBH, it's the same thinking behind any pogrom. "Those people" are rich, so breaking in and stealing everything is on the side of justice. "Those people" have secret cabals which rule the world, so it's OK to abuse and attack any individual you see.

The people with that attitude aren't aware of history. That attitude has been tried before in many countries. The end result is genocide.

It doesn't start out that way. But the road to hell is paved with good intentions.

Re: Lawsuit: Sexual harassment ‘victim’ was San Francisco business rival in disguise

#198

Post by [deleted] »

amag wrote: post #163
belorn wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The idea seems directly connected with an other idea that is sadly fairly common: assumed guilt. If we assumes that the accused is guilty until proven innocent, then the power imbalance is so great that we need to increase the counter weight by increasing the cost of false accusations. Personally I prefer the old system of innocent until proven guilty. You loose the mob justice, and you can't demand a lower standard…

In Sweden we had a minister of justice a couple of years ago who thought it would be a good idea that persons suspected of buying sexual services (which is illegal in Sweden) got their court order sent in a special large purple envelope. The purpose was that they would then be both publicly shamed (by the mailman, neighbors and what not) as well as would be less able to conceal it from their spouse.

[deleted]

Re: Lawsuit: Sexual harassment ‘victim’ was San Francisco business rival in disguise

#200

Post by matt4077 »

Pica_soO wrote: post #51
vkou wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's suppose that false rape accusations are a wide-spread problem. They aren't, they are far rarer then actual cases of rape, but let's suppose that they are. How exactly do you propose to deal with them, without a chilling effect on reporting real rapes? It is a crime that is notoriously hard to convict, to the point where most victims keep silent.

If you accuse somebody of a crime s/he didnt commit- and it comes out, you should suffer the same sentence - circumstances of the person you accused would have received as sentence.

That sounds completely arbitrary.

It's also wrong. Even assuming rape and false accusation being equally harmful, the rape penalty would have been for a crime that actually succeeded, whereas the false accusation would have only been an attempt.

Post reply on HN