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

301–310 of 368 posts

Re: Facebook fires employee for publicly scolding a colleague

#301

Post by caseysoftware »

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.

This is interesting to consider in combination with the xkcd "showing you the door" free speech comic.

If staying silent is unacceptable and saying something "wrong" is unacceptable, then it's in your own self interest to learn the "acceptable views" (whether you agree or not) and mouth them whenever the Powers that Be demand it.

That's quite twisted.

Re: Facebook fires employee for publicly scolding a colleague

#302

Post by alasdair_ »

ponsin wrote: post #47
alasdair_ wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a quote said in 1967 by Miami police Chief Walter Headley who was talking about how he will respond to protests against the police. For context, he also said he was against "young hoodlums, from 15 to 21, who have taken advantage of the civil rights campaign. ... We don't mind being accused of police brutality" The Chief got the phrase from the guy who used firehoses and dogs against children during the Birmingh…

That sounds like the "Hitler liked dogs" argument. Just because that police chief sounds like a bad person from the quote doesn't mean that everything he said was bad. In fact, I think many Americans would be fine with the use of violent force to stop violent criminals

> That sounds like the "Hitler liked dogs" argument. Just because that police chief sounds like a bad person from the quote doesn't mean that everything he said was bad

This sounds like the “straw man” argument. Just because I made a specific point about a specific utterance does not mean that I was claiming that literally every single thing he said was intrinsically racist. In fact, I think many Americans would be fine with the idea that this was a massive stretch of what I just said.

But you knew that and decided to post anyway.

Re: Facebook fires employee for publicly scolding a colleague

#303

Post by baddox »

defen wrote: post #288
baddox wrote: post #284

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is not coercion or appealing to community shaming. Those are both terms that have meanings. Telling people to consider the actions of the developers of a software project is not coercion or an appeal to community shaming.

At the end of the day it doesn't matter. No one's rights were violated. Apparently you have a different definition of what constitutes appropriate public speech for employees than Facebook does, but so what? You're not his employer. This guy said something and got fired for it. That is the system working how everyone wants it to.

Whether Facebook has the legal right to fire him is not what is being discussed.

Re: Facebook fires employee for publicly scolding a colleague

#304

Post by baddox »

kortilla wrote: post #267
baddox wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

The purpose is to inform interested people of the reason for the action (or lack thereof). That is the purpose of communication. Beyond that, you are only speculating about secret intentions, with absolutely no evidence.

Re: Facebook fires employee for publicly scolding a colleague

#305

Post by waheoo »

baddox wrote: post #280
waheoo wrote: post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You must be new to twitter. The whole thing is a solicitation for others to attack.

That’s simply not true. It is a mistake to project your coarse impression of Twitter onto every individual tweet.

Just like it is a mistake to project every instance of subtle, overt, or systemic racism on all white people but here we are, talking about privilege differences between classes in the first world while the third is pointing and laughing at our stupidity.

Re: Facebook fires employee for publicly scolding a colleague

#306

Post by messick »

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…

Interesting that you choose Watts and Compton. Almost like you choose two random neighborhoods you believe to be disadvantaged.

How exactly do your friends volunteer in this two places that just happen to show up in Dr Dre songs from the early 90’s?

Re: Facebook fires employee for publicly scolding a colleague

#307

Post by lightgreen »

stevehawk wrote: post #135
sky_rw wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

in particular because our president refuses to be eclipsed in newspaper headlines so he's likely to keep doing things that keeps these protests relevant for the next few months. (unlike #occupy)

I’m not American, and I always wonder why it’s always about Trump. The police in the US reports to the mayor, governor, whatever, but not the president. George Floyd was killed in the city where mayor and governor are democrats. In Seattle where CHAZ is mayor and governor are democrats. In New York where police brutally attacked protestors they are also dems. Why Trump is responsible for anything? What Trump is doing exactly?

Re: Facebook fires employee for publicly scolding a colleague

#308

Post by microswan »

achiang wrote: post #252

So here's a nuanced view I'm sure will get downvoted into the ground: both FB and the employee were right, but along different dimensions, and this outcome was not only inevitable, but desirable. The employee, as a white male in tech, is absolutely morally right to use his privilege to call out other powerful white males for their silence. And make no mistake, silence is complicity. Many smart philosophers have writt…

> And make no mistake, silence is complicity.

This is needlessly reductive and unhelpful. One can work to end racism and police brutality without supporting groups like BLM and/or making public declarations about the issues.

So, no. Silence is not complicity.

Re: Facebook fires employee for publicly scolding a colleague

#310

Post by Grimm1 »

rasz wrote: post #273
Grimm1 wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Politics should be kept out of the workplace.

Was a famous IBM motto in the thirties. You dont receive der Fuhrer's "The Merit Cross of the German Eagle with Star", granted to 'honor foreign nationals who made themselves deserving of the German Reich.' by talking bad about political leaders now do you. IBM commercial from 1934 'Übersicht hollerith lochkarten' https://dave.autonoma.ca/blog/2019/06/06/web-of-knowledge/im... IBM CEO photo-op with the leader https:/…

Honestly I wasn't going to reply to any comments on the thread, but this is so odious and completely stupid I believe I should address it.

Not talking politics in the workplace doesn't mean not taking a stand outside of the workplace it just means you're at work to get work done not talk politics and I as a potential coworker frankly don't want to hear your politics in the workplace and, I'd have no problem letting you know that fact if you act in real life like you post, hyperbolic and unwaranted.

In fact, taking a stand for what you believe in is one of the fundamental rights the US protects and I think you should participate in any protest, march or riot you want to. I just think you shouldn't do it at work, and if you do, for people not to be surprised that it get's you fired at a few places because people don't want you disrupting their business.

Post reply on HN