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

Facebook fires employee for publicly scolding a colleague

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 368 posts

Re: Facebook fires employee for publicly scolding a colleague

#261

Post by viraptor »

baddox wrote: post #237
viraptor wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nobody's going to spell it out. If you announce someone doesn't support as much as you'd expect them to on a public forum, that will likely cause backlash. In that case either you did it in purpose, or caused it by not thinking of consequences of your actions.

That seems to imply that all public disagreement about a popular or controversial movement is "public shaming" and thus that you would oppose all such discussion.

The difference here is the discussion/post itself is almost irrelevant. Anyone can do it. You just can't do it to a coworker without work-policy based consequences.

If you want to do public shaming and cause backlash, nobody can stop you.

Re: Facebook fires employee for publicly scolding a colleague

#262

Post by chipperyman573 »

thrwaway69 wrote: post #249
_bxg1 wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The thing is these really are issues that need to be talked about and addressed, and they really have fallen on deaf ears in the past because of lack of popular force. The people in charge just keep posturing, brushing it off, saying "yeah yeah we'll get to it", and waiting for the news cycle to move on. Nothing ever changes. But the problem is that society at large, especially on the internet, apparently just sucks…

Sometimes I wonder if answer to all of these problems is to divide lands based on ideology, politics and other factors. People are then given a choice to migrate between them every 5 years or so. Nations shouldn't be so big and migrating shouldn't be that hard. Just divide and divide until the group of people stop complaining. Racists can live with racists. Progressives can live with progressives.

This is something I've thought as well, an easy example would be abortion - one group thinks that abortion is literally murdering a child, another thinks that it's an inalienable right that a woman has to preform any operation to her own body. There's no way to make both these people happy at the same time.

There are a lot of logistic issues, though, I doubt this will ever happen.

Re: Facebook fires employee for publicly scolding a colleague

#263

Post by DenisM »

jariel wrote: post #185
dvt wrote: post #45

I'm so over this political posturing. I can't wait for ~2 weeks when everyone's going to go back to their lives like nothing happened (remember #OccupyWallStreet?). People that actually change the world don't need to advertise it on Twitter. I have friends that volunteer in Watts and Compton every other weekend (and have done so for years ) that don't need to share it on social media. I can't help but think that this…

"I can't wait for ~2 weeks when everyone's going to go back to their lives like nothing happened" Unfortunately, there is no going back here - it's partly the issues, but mostly a totally new culture of a) Twitter wars b) a new generation of people feeling that it's their 'duty' to (act out which I often believe lacks context) c) a press and pop culture climate considerably more clicky-baity and divided (just google…

Let me offer a counterpoint or two:

First, it's not an accident that this happened two months into the COVID lockdowns. Seattle PD seems to be doing much better than 10 years ago, and yet nothing happened back then and we see lots of protests now. People get more anxious being afraid of the illness and from sitting indoors with 1/8th of the usual social contact, and with unclear job prospects, so they are more likely to act on this anxiety. The summer will turnt to fall, the Woodstock will end, the COVID will recede, the anxiety will subside, and the need to earn money will come front and center again.

Second, the kids will grow up and move on. Some people will never grow up, but it's not the same numbers. The next group of kids will have another cause to fight, for the simple reason that they will not be caught dead practicing anything done by the "old people". In fact a key element of all protests is the desire by the young to distance from the old in order to find their own place under the sun. This dynamic is fueling the protests now, and this same dynamic will undo the protest movement.

I appreciate your point that marketing is more about movements today that it was earlier. Still the capitalism has turned Che Guevara into a T-Shirt franchise, so it can go either way I guess.

It could still be that you're right and I'm wrong, but I think it bears listing all considerations.

Re: Facebook fires employee for publicly scolding a colleague

#264

Post by zajio1am »

mgleitub wrote: post #16
nsainsbury wrote: post #4

I think a key phrase here is "he was dismissed for publicly challenging a colleague’s silence". In other words, he publicly harassed a colleague who (for what could be any number of perfectly valid reasons) preferred not to publicly state their beliefs. That would seem to me to be an eminently reasonable reason to fire someone. If you go around publicly harassing your colleagues to publicly state their political opin…

Indeed -- here is some additional context that the article doesn't provide: The fired employee Tweeted today: >In the interest of transparency, I was let go for calling out an employee’s inaction here on Twitter. I stand by what I said. They didn’t give me the chance to quit [0] He then specifically cited [1] the Tweet in question that was the cause: >I asked @Vjeux to follow @reactjs's lead and add a statement of su…

> It all strikes me as a modern-day example of "Havel's greengrocer"

While partially agreeing, i would note that "Havel's greengrocer" was more about situation where boths sides consired that speech act just as expression of power relations and loyality, ignoring its meaning. In this case it is more a case of "true believer".

Re: Facebook fires employee for publicly scolding a colleague

#265

Post by DenisM »

sky_rw wrote: post #109
dvt wrote: post #45

I'm so over this political posturing. I can't wait for ~2 weeks when everyone's going to go back to their lives like nothing happened (remember #OccupyWallStreet?). People that actually change the world don't need to advertise it on Twitter. I have friends that volunteer in Watts and Compton every other weekend (and have done so for years ) that don't need to share it on social media. I can't help but think that this…

My friend, you may not be aware that there is an election in a few months. This chaos will continue to escalate all summer and into the fall. Then once Trump wins re-election your really gonna see some slacktavism.

sky_rw has a good point and the post does not deserve the downvotes.

There very well might be a direct connection between the upcoming election and the protests.

Re: Facebook fires employee for publicly scolding a colleague

#266

Post by mansion7 »

whymauri wrote: post #208
mansion7 wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

I think this wins the prize for the largest strawman in this entire thread.

If there culprit wasn't trying to get their victim publicly ostracized, they would have kept their concerns private. And they did it by framing their victim as complicit, via silence. After all, as we've recently been lectured to, silence is violence.

There is literally no other justification for their actions (apart from possibly some form of mental illness, but I'm not a doctor and unqualified to guess at that)

Re: Facebook fires employee for publicly scolding a colleague

#267

Post by kortilla »

baddox wrote: post #180
devmunchies wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You’re purposefully using language to make it seem like not a big deal. It was clearly more aggressive than simply asking. And, again, context for where you are “saying they didn’t do it” matters. If it’s an internal company board vs Twitter or github matters.

It is not clearly more aggressive. What part of his language do you think are in any way aggressive?

Mentioning a private conversation on Twitter that didn’t go your way is 100% aggressive. There is no purpose other than to drum up harassment for the person you mentioned.

Re: Facebook fires employee for publicly scolding a colleague

#268

Post by waheoo »

baron816 wrote: post #92
nsainsbury wrote: post #4

I think a key phrase here is "he was dismissed for publicly challenging a colleague’s silence". In other words, he publicly harassed a colleague who (for what could be any number of perfectly valid reasons) preferred not to publicly state their beliefs. That would seem to me to be an eminently reasonable reason to fire someone. If you go around publicly harassing your colleagues to publicly state their political opin…

The “silence is complicit” stuff does really annoy me. Shaming people for not having the same political beliefs is already one thing. But shaming them for having those beliefs, but not sharing them in arenas they’re not comfortable sharing them in is quite extreme.

Sounds like you have something to hide ...

The irony.

Re: Facebook fires employee for publicly scolding a colleague

#269

Post by [deleted] »

scarmig wrote: post #145
bsamuels wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The first few replies are even more telling. When someone tells him that calling out a coworker is in bad taste, you get this gem >oh no Arthur thinks I'm rude, how will I recover https://twitter.com/aweary/status/1267927023596400642?s=20

I love that in, another Tweet, someone is giving Arthur shit for... not having his pronouns in his bio. ETA: apparently the user giving Arthur shit is just trolling

[deleted]

Re: Facebook fires employee for publicly scolding a colleague

#270

Post by [deleted] »

esperent wrote: post #165
SpicyLemonZest wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the Recoil project were contributing to racism in the US, I think we all agree that would be a problem.

Connecting facial recognition software and racism seems to be earning you downvotes here. While racism is the hot button topic right now, widespread governmental and corporate (or indeed, private) use of facial recognition software is problematic for many reasons. Erosion of privacy, sexual and non-sexual harassment and stalking, racial profiling, gender profiling, profiling for membership of any other kind of group,…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN