Live data from Hacker News

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

kapwing.com

591–600 of 666 posts

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

#591
post #586
post #583

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, what dang said was, "Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize." No reasonable person could possibly interpret this as meaning, "it is not possible to disagree, because a) she identified as being female, and b) said it was gross, c) it was mentioned in the context of abuse." You are just trolling, and I am only responding because dan…

Ok, humor me. What is the strongest plausible interpretation of: "One that had a referrer as a thread on Hacker News kept insisting I couldn't be a real person, and wanting me to do basic math like 2+3 "before he would talk to me." It was gross."? (I am not trolling. Disagreeing with your point of view is not the same thing as trolling.)

A stronger plausible interpretation is that the commenter has indeed seen many instances of harassment like the ones in the OP—which was obviously her main point; that as a SaaS founder she knows about chatbots, and would have no problem with a prospective customer who just wanted to make sure a human was at the other end (obviously it would be in her business interests to engage with such a user); and that she had additional reason to believe that the person asking her "2 + 3" etc. wasn't doing so in good faith, since she wrote "kept insisting" and "it was gross".

Now obviously I don't know what happened there, but the above interpretation is not only plausible, it's almost inevitable if you begin by assuming that the other person is just as smart as you are. Instead you began by being a jerk, assumed stupidity on the part of the other, and threw in additional insults. If you behave like that on Hacker News again we will ban you.

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

#592
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.

Without reading this article, I would never, in a million years, have believed there was an actual human being manually operating any of these "chat popups". I probably still won't believe it, but now when I see these things I have to think there's a 99.9% chance it's a bot rather than 100% chance it's a bot.

And even if that isn't the case today you can bet that that is exactly what it will be like in the near future.

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

#593
post #526

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The conclusion you can draw here is that being female will makes you the target of abuse that you wouldn't receive as another gender (or species in the case of this article). Other people have provided data that supports the case that this is a widespread problem that faces female tech-people (and even that is a subset of a larger problem). To take it to extremes, that abuse could entirely be the fault of one single…

I'm not sure you can conclude from accounts on sexual harassment alone that being a female tech-person is a less pleasant experience than being a male tech-person. Women do experience more sexual harassment in tech industry than men but they do not experience more harassment or workplace bullying overall. The harassment that is not of sexual nature is not necessarily less upsetting than sexual harassment. In fact the…

Accounts on sexual harassment give one way in which being a woman is worse than a man.

I am aware of no study or plausible anecdotal evidence of a significant issue that men are exposed to that women aren't.

Lacking something to 'balance it out' I find it reasonable to conclude that women have a less pleasant experience.

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

#594
post #554
post #416

Earlier 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…

> wrongthink This breaks the HN guideline against calling names in arguments, as well as the one that asks you to read other comments charitably (i.e. strongest plausible interpretation). To drop a term like that in a comment here is not really engaging with the other commenter, just trying to make them or their argument look bad. That leads to much lower-quality discussion, so please resist the temptation. https://n…

Being punished for being against whatever is socially trendy is aptly described as "wrongthink" regardless of what is "wrong" it's "the wrong thinking". In the 1920s, dating across racial lines was "wrongthink" and in the modern day that's flipped - along with many other progressive values. I subscribe absolutely no value to what this "wrongthink" is but merely used the term to describe being against social norms. I don't care what those social norms are and I do not care if I agree with them or not.

It isn't okay to punish someone on societies' whim for the same reason vigilante justice should be frowned upon and the same reason it isn't OK to punch a nazi in the face [0].

If we wake up tomorrow in a world where being racist is perfectly acceptable - should you be fired for not being racist? I'm not asking you to consider that a realistic possibility - I'm asking you to consider if it is okay.

There are better ways of tackling racism/sexism than taking away peoples' livelihoods (which is likely going to have an effect on making them hold their positions more extremely than it is to have them change their opinions).

[0] https://www.vice.com/en_ca/article/jppmn4/we-asked-an-ethici...

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

#595

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…

> How much will it take to convince the average HN reader that sexism actually is everywhere?

When you use the word "sexism", notice how it was not necessary to say "against women". This little example highlights the strong societal view that there exists sexism against women far more than any against men to require that clarification.

The reasons I find it necessary to highlight this fact is: from the perspective of someone trying to intentionally provoke offence in others, this view is an obvious candidate for exploitation when the target is a women.

I'm talking about trolls of course, but it seems to be so hard to get that point across here... there is a clear bias in the offensive messages, but if they are all trolls (and they certainly look that way), then surely the bias reflects the simple fact that sexism against women is a reaction provoking topic, rather than "wow we have a sexism problem look at all these legitimate sincere comments", I mean isn't the later exactly what the trolls wanted.

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

#596

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am female, and have run my own B2B SaaS as well as currently managing chat (as part of marketing) for another B2B SaaS. I have seen all sorts of comments like the ones mentioned in the article, and I hate to say it, but many of them came after we got profiled in places like Hacker News (and other tech websites, too, to be fair.) One that had a referrer as a thread on Hacker News kept insisting I couldn't be a real…

> One that had a referrer as a thread on Hacker News kept insisting I couldn't be a real person, and wanting me to do basic math like 2+3 "before he would talk to me." It was gross. I'm a bit confused, is this an example of harassment? I'd be pretty sure I was talking to a bot in one of those chat popups as well.

Maybe some context would help. Since I knew many of the folks visiting our website would assume our live chat was a chatbot, the initial message in our chat said "Hi, I'm Erica! I'm a real person, and one of the founders of [name of my company.] What questions can I answer for you today?"

I put that in there specifically to circumvent people asking if this was a bot.

The person who kept asking me to answer simple math questions had the context of this being the initial interaction. Furthermore, he didn't stop at asking once. He continued to repeatedly ask me to answer math questions, and when I asked him to please ask a question about our product or service, he would refuse and smirk about how I was obviously a bot because I refused to play his game.

It was this repeated questioning that turned it into harassment, from my perspective. And this single interaction was part of a pattern of harassment, both sexual and otherwise, that I've seen manning B2B SaaS chats.

I can also attest that men who've run the same live chats, at the same companies, with their avatars and real names do not get this sort of harassment at all. In fact, they have been shocked at the level of harassment received by simply having a female face and/or name.

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

#597

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can't make that blanket statement. A single punch is battery. A single genital grab is sexual assault. A single demand for quid pro quo sexual favors in exchange for professional rewards is sexual harassment. A single message asserting that an individual is not right for their job because of their gender creates a hostile work environment, and that's also sexual harassment. Just because there can be cases where a…

A single event can be illegal, immoral, wrong, or any one of a bunch of other words, and a single event is never harassment because harassment requires multiple events. A single demand for quid pro quo sexual favors in exchange for professional rewards is a sexual offence, a bad one, and alone it is not harassment. IANAL, though the dictionary definition sticks with me, especially the key words: "multiple", "unwanted…

> A single demand for quid pro quo sexual favors in exchange for professional rewards is a sexual offence, a bad one, and alone it is not harassment.

That's simply wrong -- a single egregious instance can certainly constitute harassment, both in terms of common sense and in terms of legal consequences. What matters is severity -- and though repeating the behavior makes it more likely to be judged as severe, one bad incident can easily exceed the threshold. A quid-pro-quo proposal of sex-for-promotion is a perfect example.

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

#598
I don't even reveal my real species on the Internet.

Apparently, the anecdata from the article backs this decision up, with compound interest.

If you can't be the perfect parody toy (for a girl or a boy), like me, be a moderately attractive white dude. And actually, we should probably all be pretending to be the same clip-art business guy that is pointing at the computer screen in all the stock photos. We're all him now.

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

#599

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A single event can be illegal, immoral, wrong, or any one of a bunch of other words, and a single event is never harassment because harassment requires multiple events. A single demand for quid pro quo sexual favors in exchange for professional rewards is a sexual offence, a bad one, and alone it is not harassment. IANAL, though the dictionary definition sticks with me, especially the key words: "multiple", "unwanted…

> A single demand for quid pro quo sexual favors in exchange for professional rewards is a sexual offence, a bad one, and alone it is not harassment. That's simply wrong -- a single egregious instance can certainly constitute harassment, both in terms of common sense and in terms of legal consequences. What matters is severity -- and though repeating the behavior makes it more likely to be judged as severe, one bad i…

But that's just a single instance, and by definition not harassment.

Unless my understanding of the word "multiple" (and "persistently" and "continually") is completely wrong...

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

#600

Kids 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 i…

Man having a comment upvoted and scrutinized really makes me wish I had written a more thought out post. Sometimes you write something in 2 minutes, in a language that isn't your first language, and only later come back to realize it was voted up and now had an expectation of actually being insightful.

> 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?

That's not at all what I was trying to say! I genuinely do believe that the attitudes expressed are genuine. My point was that the anonymity is what lets these guys get over the treshold of expressing them (so why anonymous chats seem more full of misogynist assholes than elsewhere). And I do believe their attitudes towards women is so bad that they don't even understand how bad it is. And that's a sad reflection on society. I didn't mean to express that as a "boys will be boys"-excuse on their part.

> 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.

Yes. This is much closer to the point I'm trying to make. This should be the top comment. Were were you earlier? (I have not missed the irony of my parent post being written quickly and anonymously and obviously without afterthought, so it must reflect my character and biases then...)

> 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.

Whether these interactions were in fact a small number of people I think wasn't clear from the article but I'm willing to bet that statistically it would look the same if repeated. You could make all kinds of statistics (like were the bad guys more willing to interact at all, etc) but I don't think it makes a difference to the point of the article.

I think there are huge problems with male/tech culture. I'm going to argue that the vast majority of men would never behave like this regardless of what beliefs we hold. But the fact that even a few behave like this is of course a problem that not only lies with a few. All of us create a culture which in turn creates these assholes. So even if we think we aren't assholes ourselves, we more than likely are part of making a culture of assholes.

Post reply on HN