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

Why I don't use my real photo when messaging with customers on my website

kapwing.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 666 posts

Re: Why I don't use my real photo when messaging with customers on my website

#281

Post by JabavuAdams »

verroq wrote: post #105
jakobegger wrote: post #101

Amazing. The author spends a lot of time to tell us a very convincing story how sexism affects people in our industry, and the Hacker News thread is full of people rationalizing it. - it's only because people think you're a bot - it's because of your target audience - it's because chat widgets are annoying - you don't really have enough data to make any conclusions How much will it take to convince the average HN rea…

"Rude people are sexist" or "Sexist people are rude" is about the only conclusion you can draw here (maybe not even that, correlation != causation etc etc) It doesn't even come close to showing how "sexism is everywhere". For all we know the sample could be entirely edgy 12 year olds. Tell me again how this self-admittedly "non-rigorous scientific study" proves "sexism is everywhere"? It could easily be that more att…

Why was no one rude to the dude, dude? You're engaging in cargo-cult statistics.

Re: Why I don't use my real photo when messaging with customers on my website

#282

Post by cimmanom »

taneq wrote: post #207
loup-vaillant wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Julia" isn't being insulted more than "Eric" because of sexism. "Julia" being insulted more than "Eric" is sexism. The causes of sexism is another subject. But the first step is to acknowledge sexism is going on in the first place.

What? No. "A man and a woman are treated differently" is not sexism unless there's a causal link between their sex and their treatment.

How else would you explain the difference in this case?

Re: Why I don't use my real photo when messaging with customers on my website

#283

Post by alex_duf »

kelvin0 wrote: post #267

Well there's missing the avatar picture taking a backside selfie in yoga pants, for scientific completeness of the tests... All jokes aside, I can't say I'm surprised by the results. The internet allows to remove 2 important things humans use for communication: Physical presence (5 senses) and body language (non verbal communication). I doubt any of the 'offenders' in the tests would do anything even remotely close t…

I don't think the conclusion should be "Oh well let's just make sure to be careful about our avatars".

It should be let's stop to be complete twats.

Re: Why I don't use my real photo when messaging with customers on my website

#284

Post by jerf »

UncleMeat wrote: post #192
verroq wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Rude people are sexist" or "Sexist people are rude" is about the only conclusion you can draw here (maybe not even that, correlation != causation etc etc) It doesn't even come close to showing how "sexism is everywhere". For all we know the sample could be entirely edgy 12 year olds. Tell me again how this self-admittedly "non-rigorous scientific study" proves "sexism is everywhere"? It could easily be that more att…

This one thing is obviously not the smoking gun. But in context of the thousands of other similar things it becomes impossible not to see a pattern.

Thousands of similar events, in a ratio with millions upon millions of respectful interactions. It really shouldn't be surprising when the proposed solution to the former is to endlessly harass those doing the latter and accuse them of sexism day in, day out using the largest megaphones our species has ever constructed that the latter get touchy. For which the secondary solution is then to berate them for getting touchy, which as anyone with a basic understanding of human nature could tell you, doesn't do much to endear your arguments to them. The perception that it is being done so that those doing the berating can feel good about how virtuous they are doesn't help either. It's the streetlight effect [1] in social problems; yell at the people whom it is safe and convenient to yell at, who are not (in general) the problem.

It does not help anybody to come on to a place like HN and broadcast how deplorable you think everybody else is. Even the possible benefits it could bring, like setting the tone for making it clear this isn't acceptable, is handily defeated by the amount of anger you create by accusing people willy-nilly of sexism (which, by the way, people are supposed to be angry about, remember; if sexism is one of the True Evils of the world you should not be surprised when people react to accusations of it) and the way it makes those who are behaving well start to wonder "Why, exactly, am I bothering reigning in these impulses if I'm going to be bathed in accusations of sexism anyhow?"

Whatever the solution is, it isn't going to be found in abusing broadcast media like internet discussions.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streetlight_effect

Re: Why I don't use my real photo when messaging with customers on my website

#285

Post by nukeop »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #263
nukeop wrote: post #235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>and that true anonymity doesn't exist either Yes it does, you are mistaken. An IP does not identify you if it's a proxy server or a VPN or a Tor node. All existing tracking methods can be fooled.

Only for as long as nobody really cares. OPSEC is hard. Even people for whom it's a matter of life and death fail at it routinely. Angry trolls even more so. Your first message may be anonymous, but by your third message there's a good chance someone dedicated could find you if they cared enough.

And how exactly?

Re: Why I don't use my real photo when messaging with customers on my website

#286

Post by MereInterest »

mdpopescu wrote: post #264
rocqua wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Rude people are sexist" still means we have a 'systemic' problem of sexism. In fact, one might argue that rude people being sexist are worse than polite people being sexist. Because the rude people are more disruptive over all. The statement 'sexism is everywhere' does not mean 'almost all people are sexist'. Instead, it means 'almost all women suffer from sexist attitudes in most areas of their lives. If 10% of peo…

So, you're saying that the problem is actually very small?

No. The brake line on your car is a very small part of it. If it is cut, the problem is anything but small. That a small percentage of men can have a disproportionately large effect in no way implies that the problem is small.

Re: Why I don't use my real photo when messaging with customers on my website

#287

Post by mozumder »

jakobegger wrote: post #101

Amazing. The author spends a lot of time to tell us a very convincing story how sexism affects people in our industry, and the Hacker News thread is full of people rationalizing it. - it's only because people think you're a bot - it's because of your target audience - it's because chat widgets are annoying - you don't really have enough data to make any conclusions How much will it take to convince the average HN rea…

Quit your bullshit.

I'm in the fashion industry. After 10 years and dealing with tens of thousands of people, this type of anonymous behavior doesn't happen. I'm looking at todays emails in the middle of fashion month, and 95% of the names are female. It would be a good way to lose any kind of status you have in the industry if you acted this way.

This is specifically a male-driven tech industry problem, and more specifically, an edge-lord meme-maker audience problem.

Don't be the self-absorbed douche that thinks everyone shares your same problems. That's only an excuse to pass the buck to someone else by blaming society in general instead of your specific group. Own up to it. Other industries have solved this problem by incorporating more women into.

Re: Why I don't use my real photo when messaging with customers on my website

#289

Post by JabavuAdams »

jenthoven wrote: post #48
moonka wrote: post #6

I always assumed these messages were automated helper bots, I didn't realize they are people on the other end. Now I feel a little bad about being so curt when I use them like I'm searching an FAQ.

Yes, I noticed that people hated when they thought they were talking to a bot. [This is Julia, the OC.] Sometimes I would respond to a sequence of four or five messages from a user, and they would immediately stop messaging, as if they didn’t realize a human was there. I tried that tactic for a while - a user would message me or Rachel some inappropriate demand and I would respond with “Absolutley not.” Many users wo…

Was thinking about this ... I reflexively hate bots, but it might be a UX thing -- maybe it's the popup. The pop diverts my attention from where I was looking on the site and feels like an intrusion. Same as if someone comes to your desk and grabs your mouse. So .. maybe an improvement would be to have a status-line or ticker-like text field that doesn't pop up or obscure any part of the underlying page design.

Also, IRL anecdote. My ex-wife used to get heckled and cat-called all the time when walking alone (even pushing baby pram). Number of times it happened when she was walking with me? 0. I'm amused and saddened by all the incredulity on display here. I could have said "well I've never seen it, so it's not happening..."

EDIT> You have to be a special kind of ignorant or inexperienced to not have noticed that this is how people talk to women when there are no consequences.

Re: Why I don't use my real photo when messaging with customers on my website

#290

Post by zimpenfish »

verroq wrote: post #265
thaumaturgy wrote: post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am so glad someone on HN is here to enforce rigorous standards when it comes to this topic, in particular. Because there have been multiple accounts of bad behavior, both subtle and not-subtle, at tech conferences ( https://shift.newco.co/what-its-like-to-be-a-woman-at-a-tech... , https://blog.juliaferraioli.com/2014/08/do-you-even.html ), but those aren't studies, they're just isolated experiences, so we can ignor…

>I am so glad someone on HN is here to enforce rigorous standards when it comes to this topic, in particular. I am so glad someone on HN is here to tell us exactly why we aren't allowed to have a rigorous discussion when it comes to this topic, in particular. It is interesting how you immediately reframe women getting harassed as misogyny. Nevermind women likely get more attention online as well. Let's have a look at…

> 25 times messages likely means there were 25 times more males than females in that particular room.

It's somewhat disingenuous to say "messages" when the study is specifically counting only "malicious messages" (and makes no mention of how many non-malicious messages were received.)

Post reply on HN