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

Google cancels meeting on gender controversy due to employee fears of harassment

recode.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 71 posts

Re: Google cancels meeting on gender controversy due to employee fears of harassment

#21

Post by parenthephobia »

miranda_rights wrote: post #7
throwaway12124 wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there a name for this rhetorical form? If X was a true Y, they would do what I say all Ys should do.

Yeah, the "No True Scotsman" fallacy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman

It's only a fallacy if it isn't true.

Is it not true that a supporter of freedom of speech would support other people's freedom to disagree with him without being doxxed by his supporters?

It seems to me that it is true, at least if the supporter's conception of freedom of speech includes freedom from harassment after speaking, which Damore certainly appears to be believe to be true.

Having said that, although I think it would be commendable for him to publically rebuke doxxers, it is fallacious to argue that his support for freedom of speech carries with it an obligation to do so.

Re: Google cancels meeting on gender controversy due to employee fears of harassment

#23

Post by alexandercrohde »

Sounds like an excuse to me. At least I don't see what online criticism has to do with having a town-hall, by moving the discussion in-person it prevents online sniping, no?

Edit: All that said, probably a smart move by google. Their is clearly a very strong divide in our culture right now and they probably made a PR mistake by letting themselves get caught in the middle of the issue once already.

Not only a strong divide, but one that's very emotional for a lot of people, where progress and civil discourse are especially challenging.

Re: Google cancels meeting on gender controversy due to employee fears of harassment

#25

Post by danso »

curyous wrote: post #17

This article is very skewed, it's annoying that she wrote things like "which he claimed was backed up by studies." rather than "which are backed up by studies."

Findings from scientific studies are not immutable truth. Nor does citing them automatically make your interpretation of the cited study to be truth. Perhaps the article should have stated, "In a 10-page memo Damore [made claims etc etc] and included citations and references to several scientific studies."

Re: Google cancels meeting on gender controversy due to employee fears of harassment

#26

Post by averagewall »

curyous wrote: post #17

This article is very skewed, it's annoying that she wrote things like "which he claimed was backed up by studies." rather than "which are backed up by studies."

It's common for reporters to attribute all facts to someone's claim. I think it's generally a good idea and avoids bias. Personally endorsing a claim would be risky.

Re: Google cancels meeting on gender controversy due to employee fears of harassment

#27

Post by averagewall »

Firebrand wrote: post #6

You know, when you're wrongly accused of being sexist, attempting to clear your name by having an hour-long, preening conversation with Stefan "The evil that women do is generally invisible to society which is why there’s so much violence in society" Molyneux doesn't seem like the best option.

I'd blame the public for applying guilt by association. Damore didn't agree to those things himself.

Re: Google cancels meeting on gender controversy due to employee fears of harassment

#28

Post by xxSparkleSxx »

danso wrote: post #25
curyous wrote: post #17

This article is very skewed, it's annoying that she wrote things like "which he claimed was backed up by studies." rather than "which are backed up by studies."

Findings from scientific studies are not immutable truth. Nor does citing them automatically make your interpretation of the cited study to be truth. Perhaps the article should have stated, "In a 10-page memo Damore [made claims etc etc] and included citations and references to several scientific studies."

So you can never use the phrase "backed up by studies", then?

Re: Google cancels meeting on gender controversy due to employee fears of harassment

#29

Post by danso »

alexandercrohde wrote: post #23

Sounds like an excuse to me. At least I don't see what online criticism has to do with having a town-hall, by moving the discussion in-person it prevents online sniping, no? Edit: All that said, probably a smart move by google. Their is clearly a very strong divide in our culture right now and they probably made a PR mistake by letting themselves get caught in the middle of the issue once already. Not only a strong d…

The OP doesn't refer to "online criticism". The second sentence of the lede refers to "online harassment":

> Google CEO Sundar Pichai has canceled the company’s much anticipated meeting to talk about gender issues today. The move came after some of its employees expressed concern over online harassment they had begun to receive after their questions and names have been published outside the company on a variety of largely alt-right sites.

The OP cites the letter as claiming that "our Dory questions appeared externally this afternoon, and on some websites Googlers are now being named personally":

> We had hoped to have a frank, open discussion today as we always do to bring us together and move forward. But our Dory questions appeared externally this afternoon, and on some websites Googlers are now being named personally. Googlers are writing in, concerned about their safety and worried they may be “outed” publicly for asking a question in the Town Hall.

Dory is Google's Q&A software [0]. It's possible, and likely, that the Googler's who have written in "concerned about their safety" have asked that their questions be withdrawn, which reduces the efficacy of the town hall's Q&A format.

[0] http://searchengineland.com/google-moderator-aka-dory-launch...

Re: Google cancels meeting on gender controversy due to employee fears of harassment

#30

Post by alexandercrohde »

danso wrote: post #29
alexandercrohde wrote: post #23

Sounds like an excuse to me. At least I don't see what online criticism has to do with having a town-hall, by moving the discussion in-person it prevents online sniping, no? Edit: All that said, probably a smart move by google. Their is clearly a very strong divide in our culture right now and they probably made a PR mistake by letting themselves get caught in the middle of the issue once already. Not only a strong d…

The OP doesn't refer to "online criticism". The second sentence of the lede refers to "online harassment": > Google CEO Sundar Pichai has canceled the company’s much anticipated meeting to talk about gender issues today. The move came after some of its employees expressed concern over online harassment they had begun to receive after their questions and names have been published outside the company on a variety of la…

So... let's be reasonable here. If our goal is to protect those individuals, wouldn't you simply use those questions anonymously...?
Post reply on HN