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

Glassdoor not so anonymous

webworm.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 507 posts

Re: Glassdoor not so anonymous

#151

Post by bagacrap »

phoenixreader wrote: post #140
surement wrote: post #99

This is interesting but a more accurate title would be "New Zealand law allows corporations to sue Glassdoor for user data." As the article notes: > statements of “pure opinion” are protected by the First Amendment in America. But New Zealand doesn’t have this. Statements of opinion are not categorically protected. That said, the warning that Glassdoor adds to the pages of companies that do this has to be the biggest…

Actually, this subpoena is possible because of this US statute: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/28/1782 Edit: there is even a Wiki page for it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_1782_Discovery

upvoted for relevance, but really it's NZ law that fails to sufficiently protect free speech

Re: Glassdoor not so anonymous

#152

Post by w-j-w »

croes wrote: post #15

> Zuru hasn't simply alleged that it suffered a loss; Zuru’s cofounders declared, under penalty of perjury, that because of the negative reviews, Zuru had to spend more money to recruit job candidates for a particular position. ” Does Zuru have proof it's because of negative reviews and not other causes?

No post body was provided.

Re: Glassdoor not so anonymous

#153

Post by Sparkle-san »

dragonwriter wrote: post #134
thrdbndndn wrote: post #131

> As for their first point, statements of “pure opinion” are protected by the First Amendment in America. But New Zealand doesn’t have this. Statements of opinion are not categorically protected. Instead, it all comes down to “the honest-opinion defense”. This is the most surprising part of this article to me. Not the NZ one, but the US one. Does this mean you can say whatever you want in the US without risking be la…

> Does this mean you can say whatever you want in the US without risking be labeled libel? No. The question of whether a claim is of opinion or fact is itself an objective question of fact. “Donald Trump is an evil man” is a opinion claim, and cannot be libel. “Donald Trump murdered his bastard son” is a fact claim and could (potentially) be libel.

Something to note is that the standard for defamation is higher in the US if you're a public figure such as a politician and requires you to prove actual malice. So if someone truly believed that Hillary Clinton was part of a satanic pedophile ring and told others as such, it would be almost impossible to successfully sue them.

Re: Glassdoor not so anonymous

#154

Post by 0xmohit »

cdolan wrote: post #57

Glassdoor has systematically taken down negative reviews for companies for years. I can’t say I love any of the “board” sites who engage in this type of product, and that includes Yelp, Google Places, etc

> Glassdoor has systematically taken down negative reviews for companies for years.

For a fee, of course :)

Re: Glassdoor not so anonymous

#155

Post by solmanac »

parineum wrote: post #145
altdataseller wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It might be possible to do linguistic analysis (ie. What they did to catch the Unabomber) to compare the language they used in the review vs how someone usually write in things like performance reviews, manager evaluations, emails, etc

> What they did to catch the Unabomber Have everyone's siblings read all the reviews and see if anyone recognized it?

Exactly. Not sure what to do about only children. Buddy system early on I guess.

Re: Glassdoor not so anonymous

#156

Post by lifeisstillgood »

Glassdoor has a paradox at its heart. Yes we all want to have honest reviews of corporate culture, and anonymity is probably the only way to get that. Except that how does anyone trust an anonymous post ?

The only way to get around this is some impossible to imagine global regulatory chnage where companies may never take action against negative non-anonymous postings.

I am not sure how to overcome this massive information asymmetry that corporations have against us

Re: Glassdoor not so anonymous

#157

Post by vilhelm_s »

roywiggins wrote: post #120
lotsofpulp wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But why is a US court telling Glassdoor to do something because of a New Zealand law?

Congress already passed a law to prevent foreign libel judgements (well, ones which wouldn't pass 1st amendment muster), from being enforceable by US courts. And now we just have US judges deciding they should apply NZ law without applying the 1st Amendment? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SPEECH_Act?wprov=sfla1

I think maybe this is because the user who left the review is a New Zealand national residing outside the U.S., so they do not have any first amendment rights. If the user was American, I think they could assert a first-amendment right to anonymous speech to prevent being identified. (Although such a right is not absolute, there is a balancing test involved: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cand.36...)

Re: Glassdoor not so anonymous

#158

Post by cortesoft »

bogwog wrote: post #72
yarg wrote: post #56

I just attempted to look at the reviews. There's an uncloseable pop-up telling you to log in. Normally I wouldn't bother, but curiousity got the best of me - I logged in with my Google OAuth. Not so fast - you haven't contributed to Glassdoor in the last 12 months, here's another annoying pop up and you cannot dismiss it until you do. Does anyone actually bother to use this dark pattern infused service?

There needs to be a non-profit version of this without all the desperate bullshit.

Where would you get the funding for that?

Re: Glassdoor not so anonymous

#160

Post by function_seven »

bombcar wrote: post #84
giraffe_lady wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The rumor has long been that they contact you about it. Presumably they figure it based on page views and review volume to determine your hiring rate and churn etc and sentiment analysis of your worst reviews so they aren't just shotgunning these offers at every company that has reviews on their site. Just passing along rumors I have no particularly informed insight here or verifiable reason to believe this is true,…

How else does Glassdoor make money, then? So somehow it's payola.

Every single review site that you don’t pay to access is funded by shady conflicts of interest and perverted incentives. Yelp, BBB, Amazon, Wirecutter. The whole lot. Yeah some are worse than others. But every one of them is entangled in ways that Consumer Reports or the old Angie’s List aren’t. (Angie’s List later became just another marketing channel. Originally it was a subscription service, though I don’t remember if they were double dipping or not.)
Post reply on HN