21–30 of 283 posts
How can we know if your side of the story is the truth? Either way, this is an excellent example of why the Twitter Justice System is a bad idea.
How can we know if your side of the story is the truth? Either way, this is an excellent example of why the Twitter Justice System is a bad idea.
That was my takeaway - she's doing to him exactly what he allowed other people to do to her. He's finding that he doesn't like it.
Not quite the same thing.
The reason I think specifying people by name would have been OK is that 1 - they were presumably an issue for a number of attendees due to (prior) publicly stated positions and 2 - they apparently made subsequent statements via "broadcast" media such as Twitter, for anyone to peruse. This would be quite different if the people were more private, and if all discussions had been private and/or via non-broadcast tools like SMS or WhatsApp. Plus naming names could cause me to read what they had said and even disagree with the OP, at least on the baseline of non-inviting them. However the anonymity made the post much more interesting.
Edit: I already regret making this post.
How can we know if your side of the story is the truth? Either way, this is an excellent example of why the Twitter Justice System is a bad idea.
One thing is this person didn't mention the other people. Telling this story this way isn't likely to be seen as attacking someone else / not a huge benefit to them / perhaps LESS of an incentive to lie..
How can we know if your side of the story is the truth? Either way, this is an excellent example of why the Twitter Justice System is a bad idea.
It seems like a lot (but not all) of the grief and drama the guy encountered could have been avoided by simply staying off of Twitter. Wouldn’t have stopped the crazed texts and other messages, but at the end of the day it’s also all just “words on the Internet” and I don’t see much real world harm here. EDIT: Wow, all this for just suggesting to not worry so much about what people write on Twitter. Sorry if I offend…
I was with the author until the diversity and equity part. Why does everything have to boil down to skin color and gender? I don't see why you need to offer this for a tech conference. It should be about ability and topics. Edit: I already regret making this post.
> There is no way of making a technical conference if some people feel insecure or uncomfortable. I'm surprised to hear a conference organizer say this, because I think it's an unrealistic goal. There's a difference between people feeling as if their safety is being directly threatened by someone at a conference and someone feeling uncomfortable with a speaker because of, for instance, some of their personal views th…