What an interesting experiment! I wonder how users would react if she did an uber attractive guy
Why I don't use my real photo when messaging with customers on my website
541–550 of 666 posts
Re: Why I don't use my real photo when messaging with customers on my website
#542I think anyone remotely familiar with the internet won't be surprised by these outcomes. Of course the occasional reality check is always good. I wonder to what extent plucky startups expect abuse when they put pop-up chat dialogs in their products. I imagine it's inescapable that some percentage of your user base is going to see it as an invitation to respond poorly. Something door-to-door salespeople and telemarket…
Apart from logical reasoning of this phenomena, and being polite in general, I actually hate it when someone pops up and is like “hey, you have a problem”, on any site. Especially when popup covers content and/or site controls. Multiply that by someone’s low culture and voila. I’ll not be wondered if this $10M problem solves with help me button at right top of the screen, instead of popups.
Strongly agree. Humans tend to respond negatively to what they perceive as an intrusion.
That said, what surprised me the most about the whole article was learning that sometimes there are in fact real people behind those random annoying chat boxes. I've always assumed I'd only get a self-help bot to reply so I would've never used them.
Re: Why I don't use my real photo when messaging with customers on my website
#543I think those chat boxes are rude. Here I'm am browsing the web in my underpants and some dude sneaks up on me like "hey, I see you are visiting our site! Wanna chat ?". Instead make it so that the user needs to make active action, eg clicking on a link to start the chat.
Strongly agree. Whenever something annoys me, I find the first person I can who is remotely associated with that thing and hold nothing back as I verbally abuse them and sexually harass them.
Re: Why I don't use my real photo when messaging with customers on my website
#544Kids who grew up in an environment where anonymous interaction is the norm (such as kids who have anonymous social chats at school, or do in-game chats etc) have grown so accustomed to it that I don't think they even see it as sexist, racist, bullying etc. Most would probably never say any of this to someones' face, not out of fear of consequences but simply because they know better. Yet in anonymous contact they don…
I was as amazed as Jakob[1] how much the overwhelming HN response to this story is self-serving defensiveness and rationalization, and very little acknowledgement. But I took solace in the fact that his comment was voted to the top. When I came back 20 minutes later it had dropped to #3. Three hours later it is #4, with the top-two trivializing this as just trolls not misogyny, and the third in support of women but in a way that doesn't offend the HN community's collective ego.
The #1 comment, the one I'm replying to, expresses the belief that what someone does anonymously does not reflect their character or their underlying attitudes towards women. It's just an "asshat" "short anonymous interaction". Boys will be boys. This isn't real. Don't read too much into it! Women, a bit too sensitive are we?
I looked through the 101 sub-comments to #1, and nearly all trivialize this as issues of "anonymity", "kids", "jokes", "gaming" "trash talk". One even said "It's worth noting that all of this behavior is normal and healthy." He (I think I can safely assume he is a he) also added "Additionally, this is a part of establishing or figuring out your position in the social dominance hierarchy." Yes. Male social dominance.
I did find four sub-replies (out of the 101) that focused on what this meant for women[2].
> Most would probably never say any of this to someones' face, not out of fear of consequences but simply because they know better. Yet in anonymous contact they don't think twice about it.
What you do when you don't think twice is a reflection of some truth about you (your character, your biases, your raw attitudes, your inner values, your insecurities and inadequacies) or about the culture you are a part of. It's usually both. The comments Julia received are not random insults. They are misogynist. Misogyny doesn't appear out of thin air.
> It might help to explain that everthing typed anywhere* online is usually recorded forever, and that true anonymity doesn't exist either.*
It might be more helpful to explain that it is deeply oppressive, injurious and misogynist.
As with police killings of black men, it is important that all this is recorded forever. Because without records, the oppressed are never believed by those in the same class as the oppressors. But as HN is proving right now, they are still not believed.
Many comments claim that Julia's experience is the result of some small number of trolls, not reflective of the vast majority of men, or of male tech culture. The volume of HN comments coming to the defense of men rather than women doesn't do much to bolster the "just trolls" theory. The comments here are a reflection of HN readership, and it is a good thing that this and all the other overwhelmingly dismissive comments on many other similar posts are recorded forever. They are the perfect example of what women have to live with. Trivialization. Dismissal. Ridicule. Sexism. Misogyny.
-
[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16390796
[2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16394063 , https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16394187 , https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16393947 (down-voted to gray) and https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16392373
Re: Why I don't use my real photo when messaging with customers on my website
#545Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think he did. It doesn't matter whether you believe Hitler was right or that Dipsy is the best teletubby, I believe everyone is entitled to their behaviour and beliefs during their time off work without any professional consequences to it. If there are legal consequences from something like harassement, then report to the correct authorities. No offence but it's it's people like you that make me glad I live i…
You live in a country where you can actively promote Hitler's ideology on FB, with your company in your profile, without any repercussions? Which country is this?
Ok, we've reached reductio and it's time to stop this flamewar, which you shouldn't have started in the first place. Could you please not do it again? Obviously the topic was divisive enough to begin with.
Re: Why I don't use my real photo when messaging with customers on my website
#546Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Thousands of similar events, in a ratio with millions upon millions of respectful interactions. No, the number of harassing interactions is in the millions, and the people who acknowledge it's a problem are the majority of people. You are in the minority by denying that this is a real problem. Data: http://www.pewinternet.org/2017/07/11/online-harassment-2017... > It really shouldn't be surprising when the proposed…
"No, the number of harassing interactions is in the millions," Please consider more deeply the meaning of the word "ratio". You have no idea what the actual number of either harassing interactions is, nor non-harassing interactions, as it isn't even possible to formulate a definition of "an interaction". But there is no scenario in which these interactions are not a vanishing, vanishing minority of interactions. It l…
You keep making this about yourself. Why do you think this relatively civil discussion is hurting you more than Julia was hurt by the disgusting comments people made directly to her?
> Please consider more deeply the meaning of the word "ratio". You have no idea what the actual number of either harassing interactions is, nor non-harassing interactions, as it isn't even possible to formulate a definition of "an interaction".
Yes, I do. I gave you a link to some actual data. You pulled your "ratio" out of your butt. Please investigate the data, or provide your own source, before you claim the ratio is so small it doesn't exist.
"Roughly four-in-ten Americans have personally experienced online harassment."
"women are about twice as likely as men to say they have been targeted as a result of their gender (11% vs. 5%)"
http://www.pewinternet.org/2017/07/11/online-harassment-2017...
> But there is no scenario in which these interactions are not a vanishing, vanishing minority of interactions.
That statement is flat out wrong, but feel free to prove it.
> No, I'm claiming that what you are doing... You just made it worse.
I harassed you before I commented? I made what worse, exactly? What is the problem you're talking about, and why is it worse than what Julia experienced?
> I consider your post a prime example of what I am talking about.
Please, instead of being hyperbolic and emotional, explain clearly how I or anyone is attacking or harassing you. I am arguing with you, yes, as you are arguing with me. You're acting like you didn't choose to participate here, like something unfair is happening to you. You're acting like your choice to consume media is hurting you, you're acting like your feelings reading about someone else's problems are worse than their feelings about their own problems.
Re: Why I don't use my real photo when messaging with customers on my website
#547Earlier quoted context omitted.
The problem is that, basically, no one agrees on what should be tolerable in polite society and what shouldn't be. And, in GPs case, it isn't 'society' taking action on someone, it is an individual. Is drawing a cartoon of Muhommad deserving of being fired on the spot?
Am I compelled to hire someone who advocates my murder? The nature of the paradox is that tolerance must be limited in some way, which implies judgment calls. Freedom of speech prevents the force of government from falling on those who advocate unpopular opinions. It doesn't extend to commerce.
Of course not - but without any kind of objective standard, we are going to have a hard time telling the difference between 'run of the mill intolerance', and 'popperian intolerance of the intolerable'.
Re: Why I don't use my real photo when messaging with customers on my website
#548And, no one should have any issue reporting those people to their employers. If you act like scum, particularly with your employer in your profile, society should punish you.
Your personal views should not affect your employment. Take your facism elsewhere.
> Take your facism elsewhere
This breaks the site guidelines badly. Please (re-)read https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and don't do this again, regardless of how wrong you feel someone else is.
Re: Why I don't use my real photo when messaging with customers on my website
#549Earlier quoted context omitted.
From an evolutionary biology perspective the stakes are totally different for different for men versus women. For men reproduction has almost no consequences (biologically speaking) while for women it can be life threatening. Men are biologically advantaged to make as many passes as possible until they are able to mate while women are advantaged to find the best mate possible. I think it is fair that this shapes the…
This is a phonecall . Where is reproduction involved ? I am a female myself and I think this is the kind of deep paternalizing tone that is plain wrong. Being amused and not threatened by something has nothing to do with gender but with personality. Why would a woman be more scared by a phone call than a man? All the suggestions I have here are plain hallucinatory (speaking about physical violence and reproduction ov…
I think you actually hit the nail on the head:
> physical violence
Men are much more likely to be physically violent, in my mind, than women are. So a woman getting creepy calls from a man could actually mean physical danger. A man getting creepy calls from a woman would be much less likely to be dangerous. I want to be clear: I'm talking about perception here. There are women who are just as capable as being violent as men, but women as a group are not perceived as being nearly as violent as men.
> Since I am male, I was not threatened but amused
I think it shouldn't matter what his gender is. If a man got a creepy call from another man, then the danger would be just the same as if a woman got the creepy call from a man. I think the original poster was not taking into the account that a gay man could have stalked him, and that could have been dangerous, hence "I am a man therefor not worried" when really it would have been better to say "I was not worried when I got these calls from women."
That's my take on it, anyway.
Re: Why I don't use my real photo when messaging with customers on my website
#550Earlier quoted context omitted.
People are always so quick to jump to this line of reasoning when popular opinion agrees with them. Would you be fine with losing your job for wrongthink if - or rather, when - social opinion swings the other way? It doesn't matter if you're right or wrong - you should be punished for disagreeing with society! Societal retribution for "wrongthink" is not the right answer. It's how you end up with LGBT losing their jo…
How is this post not in violation of this guideline? >Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith.
It arguably is, but since you were the one who took this thread into an off-topic and deeper circle of hell, I'd appreciate it if you'd reread the guidelines too: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.