An upcoming story about Coinbase

Post by peteretep » Thu, Nov 26, 2020, 5:20 AM UTC

csense wrote: post #66

ApolloFortyNine wrote: post #10

It's really really hard to prove your not racist. If anyone has any clue as how to do so, please share. They could have waited until the story was published I guess to share this statement, but publishing it preemptively makes sense too I believe (it's an always open entity that is incredibly easy to switch away from). But truly, when you get accused of racism, what can you even do?

That's the beauty of it. Denying the charge or defending yourself simply digs you deeper into the hole. What you're supposed to do is admit you're a racist, fall down on your knees, abjectly beg forgiveness of your accusers, and list all the new things you'll be doing to stop being racist. Then your accusers have the power to forgive you. But you really, truly have to go all the way in submitting to their demands. An…

Post by manigandham » Thu, Nov 26, 2020, 5:21 AM UTC

peteretep wrote: post #125

TerminalWarrior wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What about in the day and age where "silence is violence"? Apparently just trying to not get involved is enough to make a whole company raciest?

Announcing a policy where you’re saying “we’re above politics and we’ll pay you to leave if you’re not” is quite definitely not an example of “trying to not get involved”

Post by Rebelgecko » Thu, Nov 26, 2020, 5:21 AM UTC

drewbug01 wrote: post #78

jimmygrapes wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems to me that Coinbase is well aware of NYT's recent decline from paper of record to race-baiting propaganda, and knows that instead of being factual about numbers NYT will use weasel words to make it seem like Coinbase's entire company is run by "far right extremist racists" or whatever similar language. Of course, only time and the publication of the NYT article will tell, but given their recent track record…

> race-baiting propaganda I think it’s reasonable to debate the quality of the NYT (and I have serious issues with a lot of what they publish - and dear lord, don’t get me started on how I feel about their opinion columnists). But I do think that calling the NYT “race-baiting propaganda” is a gross mischaracterization of what they do.

Post by ajhurliman » Thu, Nov 26, 2020, 5:22 AM UTC

drewbug01 wrote: post #53

adtac wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not really. They're just trying to own the narrative with this post here. Streissand effect only applies when someone tries to cover up an already-published piece of fact.

That’s not how I’ve understood the Streisand effect - nor how Wikipedia does either: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect From the link: > The Streisand effect is a social phenomenon that occurs when an attempt to hide, remove, or censor information has the unintended consequence of further publicizing that information, often via the Internet. It’s not so much about whether a piece of information has been…

Post by Barrin92 » Thu, Nov 26, 2020, 5:23 AM UTC

nilkn wrote: post #59

I have to wonder to what extent this is just punishment from the establishment for Coinbase’s recent rejection of political activism in the workplace. Of course we will need to see the article from the NYT first before drawing any conclusions, but the timing is pretty suspicious; this implies that the NYT more or less launched this project immediately after that announcement went out.