Live data from Hacker News

Mark Zuckerberg faces employee blowback over ruling on Trump comments

reuters.com

381–390 of 410 posts

Re: Mark Zuckerberg faces employee blowback over ruling on Trump comments

#381

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If AOC or Bernie Sanders tweets again about "Revolution" If generic, or as a principle? No. If they say "pick up weapons and shoot those who dissent"? Then they're advocating or threatening, and that should be handled similarly.

Ok, so it needs to be explicit when liberals tweet, it but we can evaluate the historical context when conservatives tweet, right? What about that time De Blasio quoted Che Guevara "Hasta la victoria siempre"? Any problem with that? It's like quoting Hitler about victory. The point here is that people aren't going to agree on the rules - so asking to hand this judgement process over to Corporations is lunacy.

I think generic quotations, on either side, is entirely okay.

I think comparing "ever onward to victory" to "when the looting starts, the shooting starts", i.e. "I approve of and will authorize the use of lethal force for property crimes" is a little of a stretch.

Or "vicious dogs" for people protesting at the White House. These are directly relevant.

"I will use the unlimited powers of our military" - so many problems with this statement.

This is someone making direct and focused statements of threat and intimidation, who has a history of racist and violence-encouraging statements, from "punch him in the face, I'll pay your legal bills" and on.

The challenge is that finding left-leaning populations actively, pro-actively advocating (sorry, "warning") of violent action is a lot more challenging.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg faces employee blowback over ruling on Trump comments

#382

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's really not that obtuse, he wants the information and to decide for himself... Your way leaves a huge hole for someone to pull wool over your eyes

Facts and editorialism are not the same thing. I want my medical textbook (and the journalist reporting on it) to not lie to me. Whether I elect to choose the treatment after side effects are disclosed is up to me. I'd rather not have to make a medical judgement as to which of 10 pharmaceutical companies are making a false claim however.

Who is disagreeing with this? The issue is that people disagree on what the facts are, so when twitter does a fact check some people would disagree, what if it's a close call?

I'm not going to agree or disagree with their assessment I don't really care. I'm saying I don't give a shit what "twitter corp" thinks about X persons tweet. I want to read it and see for myself.

Don't turn to Twitter for a medical issue... Who would do that? If you're looking in a textbook as mentioned you will find well referenced established science, or speaking to a medical professional. That is not Twitter and was never it's strength

Re: Mark Zuckerberg faces employee blowback over ruling on Trump comments

#383
post #354

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> limit conversations to work topics only. That's an awful work environment. Ok, maybe it's because I'm older (but not a boomer), but I don't think that's an awful work environment. I use dinner party rules on social media and at the workplace. That means I avoid talking about politics, religion, etc. It's not because I'm afraid of being outed for my views or anything, it's because I look at work as work, and not a p…

>dinner party rules That won't protect you. When your employer is actively signalling and funding support for particular groups or political positions, failure to join in is taken as a political action, and you might get attacked by co-workers for being anti-group or anti-position .

I don't know what one needs to be protected from. If your coworkers are harasssing you for not being political, that's usually the point where you escalate the issue. If that doesn't get you anywhere, that's a signal to leave (and by leave, I mean by not announcing it to the world with a "Why I left X" blog post).

Maybe I'm lucky, in my 25+ years of working, I haven't had to deal with that level of unprofessional behaviour (but I've also generally avoided working with startups and "interactive" agencies for the past 10+ years).

Re: Mark Zuckerberg faces employee blowback over ruling on Trump comments

#384
post #379

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not remotely the definition of the word public. By that logic, your front yard is public property if you let your neighbors on it.

Yes, "public" is where ever the people are.

Words can have multiple definitions. That you allow some members of the public (your neighbors) onto your private property (your front yard) does not negate your right to control access to your private property, nor does it make your front yard public domain for anybody to gather on without your permission. It doesn’t make it “public”.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg faces employee blowback over ruling on Trump comments

#385
post #379

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, "public" is where ever the people are.

Words can have multiple definitions. That you allow some members of the public (your neighbors) onto your private property (your front yard) does not negate your right to control access to your private property, nor does it make your front yard public domain for anybody to gather on without your permission. It doesn’t make it “public”.

Yes, I think we are in agreement. I am using that specific definition of public here because I feel like it's the most representative of the soul of these homonymous legal concepts that have morphed over a few hundred years into tools of oppression. The law wouldn't exist without the people, and it's time to bring these concepts back into alignment.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg faces employee blowback over ruling on Trump comments

#386
post #354

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>dinner party rules That won't protect you. When your employer is actively signalling and funding support for particular groups or political positions, failure to join in is taken as a political action, and you might get attacked by co-workers for being anti-group or anti-position .

I don't know what one needs to be protected from. If your coworkers are harasssing you for not being political, that's usually the point where you escalate the issue. If that doesn't get you anywhere, that's a signal to leave (and by leave, I mean by not announcing it to the world with a "Why I left X" blog post). Maybe I'm lucky, in my 25+ years of working, I haven't had to deal with that level of unprofessional beh…

Counter-point: the "silence is violence", and the "being silent is being complicit" are somewhat popular suppositions. You can find public posts chiding people with those words for not being politically active enough.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg faces employee blowback over ruling on Trump comments

#387
Twitter just declared war with the federal government. The employee are effectively asking Zuckerberg to divebomb his own company. Zuckerberg has been in those congressional hearings.

He knows exactly why he doesn't want to get in this splashzone. Cause what twitter did is so far over so many lines I can see them being the same after the FCC starts making rules for them like ISPs in 60 days.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg faces employee blowback over ruling on Trump comments

#388
post #279

Remember when "I disagree with what you say, but will defend your right to say it" was a thing? I certainly do. How far we've fallen as a culture since then.

People misunderstand that quote as much as people misunderstand the concept of freedom of speech. Freedom of speech means that the police can't raid your house for what you think or say or a judge cannot rule against you for what you think or say. But freedom of speech doesn't mean that other people are forced to either listen to you or provide with their own private means (like content hosting or bandwidth) for you…

But that has always stood in media and on the metaphysical soap box. Which is why media companies haven't been able to censor politicians and its illegal for politicians to block you on social media.

Look at the AOC law suit. She tried silencing people on her private social media but because she is now in government she got sued immediately.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg faces employee blowback over ruling on Trump comments

#389

I think we all know he is not "facing" anything. People that collect big and stable salaries will not change company employment over this. Virtue signalling is cheap, endangering your family's livelihood is hard. "It's very difficult to make somebody understand something, especially if their salary depends on them not understanding it." Facebook is, in general, an unethical company. And this has been known for a long…

This comment breaks the HN guidelines. Read it closely: it's completely generic other than a shallow response to a single word in the title ("facing"). It offers nothing but the exact same indignation that has been expressed thousands, maybe hundreds of thousands, of times already. It is, in fact, a perfect specimen of a generic comment, the kind we don't want here because it makes discussion repetitive and ragey: https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que....

Therefore, please don't post like this to HN. Repetitive indignation is the opposite of curious conversation, and we seek the latter. https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu...

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Disclaimey bits:

1. No, I'm not siding with Facebook or whatever; just with the intended spirit of HN. A comment like this breaks that spirit while seeming to be on topic.

2. I don't mean to pick on you personally. It sucks to be singled out and there is zero intention of shaming here. I'm just picking on this particular comment, about something that we basically all do at times.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg faces employee blowback over ruling on Trump comments

#390
post #389

I think we all know he is not "facing" anything. People that collect big and stable salaries will not change company employment over this. Virtue signalling is cheap, endangering your family's livelihood is hard. "It's very difficult to make somebody understand something, especially if their salary depends on them not understanding it." Facebook is, in general, an unethical company. And this has been known for a long…

This comment breaks the HN guidelines. Read it closely: it's completely generic other than a shallow response to a single word in the title ("facing"). It offers nothing but the exact same indignation that has been expressed thousands, maybe hundreds of thousands, of times already. It is, in fact, a perfect specimen of a generic comment, the kind we don't want here because it makes discussion repetitive and ragey: ht…

I guess it can be viewed that way.

As much respect as I have for the moderation team on HN, this time I will respectfully disagree -- but I will improve the website by restraining myself from commenting on such hot semi-political discussions in the future.

That would be best for everyone, I believe.

---

EDIT: (after your edit): Rest assured, I am not taking it personally nor will I "attack" or press the matters further. I agree my comment wasn't well-spirited and was dismissive.

It's just that sometimes I get tired of what I perceive as virtue signalling.

But I agree that it's best to keep that opinion to myself and not add negativity to the forum.

Thank you for bringing this perspective. I feel I actually needed it.

Post reply on HN