Agent fired from literary agency for using Parler and Gab • Hacker News Board

Re: Agent fired from literary agency for using Parler and Gab

#201

Post by Jare » Wed, Jan 27, 2021, 9:21 AM UTC

dmix wrote: post #164

Proziam wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The better question is what percentage of Parler users fit the stereotype ? Based on what I've seen and people I know who were active on Gab and Parler I would venture to say it's not nearly as high as people think. The amount of people with truly fringe beliefs is pretty small, even when concentrated.

> The amount of people with truly fringe beliefs is pretty small, even when concentrated. And I'd personally much rather have this small group of people outletting their anger onto the internet instead of IRL. Pushing them further and further into a corner with ever expanding censorship and expecting them to become good tolerant citizens has always seemed like a fools game to me.

That was the right frame of thinking before "onto the internet" came to mean "with the capability to reach, engage and influence millions of normal people".

Also, receiving thousands of threats and being doxed "onto the internet" has very serious consequences IRL.

Re: Agent fired from literary agency for using Parler and Gab

#202

Post by cheph » Wed, Jan 27, 2021, 9:22 AM UTC

echlebek wrote: post #197

cheph wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Just a reminder that Newsweek ceased publication back in 2013, and the rights to its brand were purchased by an odd Christian sect, somewhat along the lines of The Washington Times and the Reunification Church. Cite? EDIT: Seems like this comment is false if wikipedia is to believed: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newsweek#2018_investigation_an... > The Manhattan District Attorney's office raided Newsweek's headquar…

The very article you posted backs up the claim in the very first paragraph.

No it does not. This is the first paragraph:

> The Manhattan District Attorney's office raided Newsweek's headquarters in Lower Manhattan on January 18, 2018, and seized 18 computer servers as part of an investigation related to the company's finances.[64] IBT, which owned Newsweek, had been under scrutiny for its ties to David Jang,[64] a South Korean pastor and the leader of a Christian sect called "the Community".[65]

At no point does it say IBT is an "odd Christian sect". At no point does it say they were purchased by an "odd Christian sect". Having ties to != owned by. But you know this.

Re: Agent fired from literary agency for using Parler and Gab

#203

Post by johnchristopher » Wed, Jan 27, 2021, 9:24 AM UTC

paperwasp42 wrote: post #22

D13Fd wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I honestly don't know why people use "post what you're thinking" style social media at all at this point. With employers being so sensitive, how can the cost/benefit analysis ever really result in a determination that it's a good idea to be active on Twitter/Facebook (or Gab, Parler, TheDonald.win, etc.)? Maybe that's part of what makes things get so extreme on those sites. The most reasonable people know enough not…

I have literally seen NYT bestselling authors talk about how they're super excited to publicly heckle an author at his next book signing. And join in on conversations promoting burning his book. His crime? Writing a female character who goes on the run, has limited food, and trains in martial arts--which leads to her losing weight. This was, apparently, fat-shaming and deeply sexist. The authors involved in these thr…

Ah, reminds me of the difference of treatment between Sam and Frodo in Lord of the Rings:

>> Looking in a mirror he was startled to see a much thinner reflection of himself than he remembered: it looked remarkably like the young nephew of Bilbo who used to go tramping with his uncle in the Shire; but the eyes looked at him thoughtfully.

> Pauline Baynes's illustration of the Fellowship, done while Tolkien was alive, shows all four hobbits as being of very much the same proportions. Oddly enough, the movie shows Sam as more or less the same build when he leaves Hobbiton and when he reaches Mordor, even though he had some weeks of semi-starvation.

https://scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/92576/is-there-any...

Re: Agent fired from literary agency for using Parler and Gab

#204

Post by evilsetg » Wed, Jan 27, 2021, 9:26 AM UTC

HDMI_Cable wrote: post #133

DaiPlusPlus wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tens of millions of people in the US alone don't have the privilege of being on the supply-side for a high-demand skillset. "they're probably not worth working for anyway" is not a reasonable nor helpful response to people in that situation.

That's a sad thing though, that people don't have enough leverage against their employer for more benefits.

I think this is what unions are for. Powerless alone but strong together.

Re: Agent fired from literary agency for using Parler and Gab

#205

Post by unishark » Wed, Jan 27, 2021, 9:27 AM UTC

filmgirlcw wrote: post #146

neartheplain wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You’ve gone and assumed the worst. “Trying to get that employee fired?” I just don’t see it. Anyway, the Metro employees union would never go for it. The no-eating rule is a fairly big deal on Metro. A twelve-year-old girl was famously arrested for eating a single French fry [0], in a case (Hedgepeth v. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority) that went all the way to the U.S. Court of Appeals, where the arres…

I’m not defending the vitriol or racist and toxic remarks she received; I’m saying she was using her position as a blue checkmark to publicly shame someone and to try to get them fired. And as a self-described social media and communications expert, she should have known that using her position of power to shame/snitch on someone could carry consequences. She could have reported it privately, but she chose to use her…

> She could have reported it privately, but she chose to use her platform that included her social status ... to be a narc instead.

Reporting it privately is still "narcing", isn't it? You're saying she'd have been ok if she kept her anonymity while doing the snitching that the twitter mob seeks to "cancel" people for? Well sure.

Re: Agent fired from literary agency for using Parler and Gab

#206

Post by iso1631 » Wed, Jan 27, 2021, 9:30 AM UTC

nmfisher wrote: post #111

hapless wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's worth noting that Frederick's employees quit -- her statements on twitter angered her staff so much they no longer wished to associate with her. That's not cancel culture. That's common sense. Don't make your coworkers so angry that they'd rather be jobless than spend time in your presence. The freedom of speech isn't the freedom to speak without consequences. Frederick spoke her mind in a public square, and sig…

"It's a free country" doesn't really add much to the discussion. No-one is saying her employees should be legally forced to stay with the company. What is being said, however, is that we should reverse this spiralling cultural trend of thinking it's OK to rail-road/strong-arm those not on your "side". It's a base, mob instinct that has caused riots, factionalism, witch hunts and genocide all throughout human history.…

> It's a base, mob instinct that has caused riots, factionalism, witch hunts and genocide all throughout human history

This is it. In the last 10 years or so mob instinct has shown up in many ways - in looting stores, in doxing people and cancelling people who say the wrong things, in trying to overthrow governments, or just simple pile-ons. In part this has been fanned by big tech, but not entirely

The trick is tackling the causes of the creation of the mobs. "You're either with us or against us" is not new - Clinton and Bush were using it 20 years ago, but Cicero used it in Rome and it's in the bible. Big Tech is certainly a key part of the creation and expanse as it connects people, and people are encouraged to "pick a side". In traditional discourse what you'd say to your sportsmates up the pub could be a very different conversation to what you say to your collegues at an awayday. With social media, what you say to one, you say to all -- walking between worlds is difficult.

You might agree with group A on one thing (say housing), and group B on another thing (say BLM), and group C on another thing (say economy), but if those don't all align with your side, you won't fit in.

Re: Agent fired from literary agency for using Parler and Gab

#207

Post by gnicholas » Wed, Jan 27, 2021, 9:30 AM UTC

_o0rc wrote: post #176

gnicholas wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's also a question I will be asking any potential employer I interview with, going forward, for the same reason. This would be a very strange question to be asked of an interviewer. > Yes it means I can't hire employees in California Per the article I linked to up-thread, it's not just CA: California, Colorado, Louisiana, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, Nevada, South Carolina, West Virginia, Seattle, Ann Arbor, an…

It would be a strange question, depending on the scenario. You can imagine I probably don’t anticipate being in interviews where I’m asking that of somebody who isn’t the primary executive. (In other words, I wouldn’t want to work under someone whose judgement I don’t trust, and this would be a dealbreaker on judgement.) You’re correct that it rules out some important locations in tech, and I do think geography will…

IMO it would show exceedingly bad judgment to ask someone how they voted in an interview. I wouldn’t categorically refuse to hire such a person, but it would be a strike against.

Re: Agent fired from literary agency for using Parler and Gab

#208

Post by evilsetg » Wed, Jan 27, 2021, 9:35 AM UTC

sto_hristo wrote: post #175

Being canceled for what you write, think, your opinions... That is a major part of life in any communist regime. Difference being that in communism it's the state that does the monitoring and canceling, while here - the people themselves.

I would say this is true for any dictatorship or even some authoritarian regimes. How is it related specifically to communism? Full disclosure: I am a communist.

Re: Agent fired from literary agency for using Parler and Gab

#209

Post by thaumasiotes » Wed, Jan 27, 2021, 9:43 AM UTC

OJFord wrote: post #190

marton78 wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel you, as an European engineer far away from such matters, PoC means "proof of concept" to me :)

I had no idea what it meant and actually guessed it was some kind of slur (in line with PoS) until I learnt recently. Weird term. Doesn't work unabbreviated as an adjective, an adjectival formation ('coloured') is long out of politically-correct favour (at least it is in the UK), and why, is 'of colour' different/better/at all a good description of someone anyway? I'm, er, 'without colour', so it's hardly for me to o…

> why is 'of colour' different/better/at all a good description of someone anyway?

It's different in that it's a different phrase. It's better because it's different; terminology in this area is driven purely by fashion.

https://www.gocomics.com/bloomcounty/1988/08/28

Re: Agent fired from literary agency for using Parler and Gab

#210

Post by vidarh » Wed, Jan 27, 2021, 9:44 AM UTC

unishark wrote: post #205

filmgirlcw wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m not defending the vitriol or racist and toxic remarks she received; I’m saying she was using her position as a blue checkmark to publicly shame someone and to try to get them fired. And as a self-described social media and communications expert, she should have known that using her position of power to shame/snitch on someone could carry consequences. She could have reported it privately, but she chose to use her…

> She could have reported it privately, but she chose to use her platform that included her social status ... to be a narc instead. Reporting it privately is still "narcing", isn't it? You're saying she'd have been ok if she kept her anonymity while doing the snitching that the twitter mob seeks to "cancel" people for? Well sure.

There's a very substantial different between privately reporting someone, and publicly shaming someone for a behaviour, which has potentially far more extensive consequences, including putting additional pressure on the employer to act harshly.

It's perfectly reasonable to think one or both is wrong while still thinking one is far worse than the other.