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

Microsoft Moves to End Secrecy in Sexual Harassment Claims

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 115 posts

Re: Microsoft Moves to End Secrecy in Sexual Harassment Claims

#71

Post by dragonwriter »

geofft wrote: post #42
jeffdavis wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Courts do have stricter standards for admission of evidence and verdicts. But the basic innocent-by-default is a general principle that should apply pretty much everywhere. And there should be consistency and standards in media reporting of allegations, and for HR decisions.

The thing about innocent-by-default is that false accusations are also a serious crime with serious penalties (for good reason), and if you believe that the accused is affirmatively innocent, you have to believe that the accused is guilty. The reason that courts, specifically, do not have this paradox is that "innocent" simply means "we do not have the evidence to justify using the extraordinary punishment powers res…

> The thing about innocent-by-default is that false accusations are also a serious crime with serious penalties (for good reason), and if you believe that the accused is affirmatively innocent, you have to believe that the accused is guilty.

That's usually not strictly true; knowing false accusations are a crime, but it's usually possible for the accuser's statement not to be a knowing falsehood while the accused is not factually guilty.

Re: Microsoft Moves to End Secrecy in Sexual Harassment Claims

#72

Post by dragonwriter »

ggg9990 wrote: post #62
solidsnack9000 wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

...if you believe that the accused is affirmatively innocent, you have to believe that the accused is guilty. This is not strictly or even practically true, but you acknowledge that later. When the defendant prevails in a court case, we don’t turn around and lock up the plaintiff. You go on to say: ...a world in which all who accuse people of sexual harassment are effectively guilty-until-proven-innocent in the court…

False accusation is a particular problem for sex crimes because the legality of the act depends on consent. You can't explain away a dead body saying "he asked me to murder him." But you can explain away evidence of sexual intercourse by saying "it was consensual."

> False accusation is a particular problem for sex crimes because the legality of the act depends on consent.

That's true of criminal assaults in general; striking someone with their consent is usually not a crime.

> You can't explain away a dead body saying "he asked me to murder him."

You can in jurisdictions where assisted suicide is legal. And even where it's not, a combination of no intent to kill plus consent can render an act that otherwise would be murder (even with either of those factors alone) into a non-criminal.

Sexual assault isn't different because consent matters, it differs because juries are more sympathetic to the accused (at least, accused from certain backgrounds) when it comes to determining whether there is sufficient grounds to believe consent may have been present or to dismiss such a belief.

Re: Microsoft Moves to End Secrecy in Sexual Harassment Claims

#73

Post by DanBC »

sverige wrote: post #15
gpm wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Accusers getting more money isn't good for the public. Incentive to settle without a fair trial in something as serious as sexual assault is not only not good for the public, it's bad for the public. Due process exists for a damn good reason. Preventing sexual assaults is good for the public, publicizing cases of sexual assaults may well have a tendency to do that. Based on your arguments above, I would come to the c…

I would argue that the recent wave of "guilty until proven innocent" and "guilty when accused, and more guilty if accused by more people" is even worse for public policy. Due process does indeed exist for a good reason, one of which is to prevent a situation where mere accusations have the power to destroy lives. Does this mean I think any or all of the recent high-profile cases are innocent? Oh shit, wait, it doesn'…

> Due process does indeed exist for a good reason, one of which is to prevent a situation where mere accusations have the power to destroy lives.

No, that's untrue. Innocent until proven guilty is only about the state's power to impose punishment. Innocent until proven guilty is used for even the most mild criminal offences where long term repercussions are unlikely.

A person's life can be destroyed in a civil trial where balance of probabilities, not beyond all reasonable doubt, is used. See all the parents who've been prevented from contact with their children because courts used balance of probabilities.

Re: Microsoft Moves to End Secrecy in Sexual Harassment Claims

#74

Post by dragonwriter »

PastaMonster wrote: post #70
greglindahl wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This discussion is about allegations which range from rape down to "acting creepy." Some of these are crimes. Even if we aren't initially talking about a crime, I would find it unjust if a billionaire quietly paid off 100 victims of sexual harassment, and then committed an assault. "Who could have predicted this?!?!"

Here's a thought, define these, be specific, don't be vague: Sexual harassment, creepy, weird, offensive, hostile, racist, rape, consensual, troll, etc. All this nonsense is subjective. I mean to some people, being hostile and offensive is to have a differing opinion. For how long is this nonsense to continue? People are too afraid and walking on egg shells to have a normal human conversation. Now that IS a hostile w…

> People are too afraid and walking on egg shells to have a normal human conversation.

I see lots of people aggressively asserting this, but little evidence of the actual behavior described.

People who are yelling to everyone they can find about an environment that forces them to walk on eggshells aren't actually in such an environment.

Re: Microsoft Moves to End Secrecy in Sexual Harassment Claims

#75

Post by friendzis »

geofft wrote: post #42
jeffdavis wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Courts do have stricter standards for admission of evidence and verdicts. But the basic innocent-by-default is a general principle that should apply pretty much everywhere. And there should be consistency and standards in media reporting of allegations, and for HR decisions.

The thing about innocent-by-default is that false accusations are also a serious crime with serious penalties (for good reason), and if you believe that the accused is affirmatively innocent, you have to believe that the accused is guilty. The reason that courts, specifically, do not have this paradox is that "innocent" simply means "we do not have the evidence to justify using the extraordinary punishment powers res…

> But humans don't work like that. When we think "innocent," we don't think "I have insufficient data," we think "they didn't do it". It is arguably a flaw in human thinking, but it's a flaw we have to live with and work with.

This interestingly maps to computer science. When talking about accusations for some reason we expect outcome to be binary, while the outcome is ternary. Binary logic is difficult, ternary logic is even more so.

Given ternary input state of accuser (false accusation, real accusation, ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ accusation) and ternary input of state of accused (guilty, not guilty, ¯\_(ツ)_/¯), I try to think of logical (relational?) operator/function which combines these inputs and yields ternary verdict. Given that output should be undefined unless both states are known, there should be AND between the states. Maybe something like Verdict = Accuser AND NOT Accused which would yield a verdict only if both accusation and guilt can be proven. But we still have a can of worms unopened regarding evidence and what evidence actually proves, because more likely than not evidence will prove or rule out possibility that something has happened

Re: Microsoft Moves to End Secrecy in Sexual Harassment Claims

#76

Post by [deleted] »

evgen wrote: post #67
skookumchuck wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm interested. Produce one that was on the scale of what happened to the Lacrosse players.

Harvey Weinstein. More people suffered and to a greater extent, more money involved. If you didn't have the ability to Google up the Duke case you could not name a single person involved, but would have no problem naming some of Harvey's victims.

[deleted]

Re: Microsoft Moves to End Secrecy in Sexual Harassment Claims

#77

Post by badwulf »

electrograv wrote: post #13

Very happy to see a major tech company that puts their money (and policy) where their mouth is, on such an important issue — even when it goes against the “legally safest” status quo that companies tend to take. Other tech companies and tech culture in general should take note, and follow suit if they actually care about this issue. Executives and HR statements are nice to hear I suppose, but even better is actual ch…

Do you believe it's good to have people bring their personal dramas into a company that you own?

Do you also believe that the company you work for should replace the police or the court?

Do you think it's good to have your company take mob rage for something that happened between your employees and neither you nor your company had anything to do with?

Re: Microsoft Moves to End Secrecy in Sexual Harassment Claims

#78

Post by MaxBarraclough »

rayiner wrote: post #56
sverige wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would argue that the recent wave of "guilty until proven innocent" and "guilty when accused, and more guilty if accused by more people" is even worse for public policy. Due process does indeed exist for a good reason, one of which is to prevent a situation where mere accusations have the power to destroy lives. Does this mean I think any or all of the recent high-profile cases are innocent? Oh shit, wait, it doesn'…

Talk of “innocent until proven guilty” is misplaced. In a workplace context, you’re not judging guilt and innocence. You’re resolving a civil dispute, where nobody’s freedom is at stake, only property. Even in courts the standard used for civil disputes isn’t “guilt beyond a reasonable doubt” but a mere “more likely than not” conclusion. I’m a civil litigator. We never talk about “innocent until proven guilty.” Imagi…

What's your opinion of Title IX? (Forgive my assumption that you practice in the USA.)

My understanding is that it has college campuses hearing criminal cases.

(I'm British, and only learned about this yesterday.)

Re: Microsoft Moves to End Secrecy in Sexual Harassment Claims

#79

Post by tomjakubowski »

MaxBarraclough wrote: post #78
rayiner wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Talk of “innocent until proven guilty” is misplaced. In a workplace context, you’re not judging guilt and innocence. You’re resolving a civil dispute, where nobody’s freedom is at stake, only property. Even in courts the standard used for civil disputes isn’t “guilt beyond a reasonable doubt” but a mere “more likely than not” conclusion. I’m a civil litigator. We never talk about “innocent until proven guilty.” Imagi…

What's your opinion of Title IX? (Forgive my assumption that you practice in the USA.) My understanding is that it has college campuses hearing criminal cases. (I'm British, and only learned about this yesterday.)

That’s a misunderstanding of Title IX. Under the Obama administration’s guidelines, incidents of sexual harassment and assault on university campuses were treated as violations of the victim’s civil rights. They were required to give a hearing if a purported victim came forward with an accusation to determine, using the “preponderance of evidence” standard, whether the alleged incident occurred, and if so, to discipline the student responsible under the university’s code of conduct. This might take the form of counseling, probation, suspension, expulsion, or whatever.

The Trump administration relaxed the requirement that universities adhere to the “preponderance of evidence” standard.

This is all, for incidents where a crime occurred, in parallel to the usual criminal court system. No university Title IX panel is trying criminal cases.

Re: Microsoft Moves to End Secrecy in Sexual Harassment Claims

#80

Post by otterley »

geofft wrote: post #44
dominotw wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Telling some one a sex joke is a not a crime, killing someone is a crime. Edit: Sexual harassment, as such, is not a crime under state or federal law in the U.S. Murder is a Crime. Makes no sense to compare it to murder. apples oranges.

Creating a hostile work environment that constitutes discrimination on sex is absolutely, unquestionably, a federal crime, a violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (see Supreme Court cases Meritor Savings Bank v. Vinson , Ellison v. Brady , Oncale v. Sundowner Offshore Services , etc. etc. etc. - and Meritor and Oncale had no dissents, and Ellison only had one dissent from a justice who felt that the…

You should seek legal counsel as well, because it is clear that you are not an attorney (or, if you are, you should be disbarred for incompetence). The statue is clear; it plainly states the Government can only bring a civil action to enforce Title VII. Did you actually bother to read it?

As an actual attorney (this is not legal advice), I advise you to stick to what you know.

Post reply on HN