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

Stanford faculty say anonymous student bias reports threaten free speech

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 169 posts

Re: Stanford faculty say anonymous student bias reports threaten free speech

#31

Post by lliamander »

kube-system wrote: post #9
burnished wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its unclear to me the point you are trying to make. It reads to me that you think because that law does not apply here that the principles involved do not? Your points about freedom of association are likewise illegible in this context.

The principles outlined in the Bill of Rights are within the context of a relationship with a government that uses force to apply their actions without any higher recourse. Losing a job is different in magnitude than being sentenced to death or imprisonment.

Anonymous accusations are easy to abuse. They should be treated with a skeptical eye regardless of the context. Any institution that makes decisions on such accusations is going to be rife with petty, vindictive politics.

Re: Stanford faculty say anonymous student bias reports threaten free speech

#32

Post by kube-system »

lliamander wrote: post #31
kube-system wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The principles outlined in the Bill of Rights are within the context of a relationship with a government that uses force to apply their actions without any higher recourse. Losing a job is different in magnitude than being sentenced to death or imprisonment.

Anonymous accusations are easy to abuse. They should be treated with a skeptical eye regardless of the context. Any institution that makes decisions on such accusations is going to be rife with petty, vindictive politics.

I don’t disagree. But “should” is different than “fundamental right”.

Re: Stanford faculty say anonymous student bias reports threaten free speech

#33

Post by freejazz »

WalterBright wrote: post #3

Anonymous accusations are a fine way to harass and intimidate anyone you disagree with or have a grudge against. As the article points out, it's a fine tool for oppression. A fundamental right we have in the US is the right to face our accusers, for good reason. Here's the text of it: > Sixth Amendment > In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury…

Key word: criminal prosecutions

Re: Stanford faculty say anonymous student bias reports threaten free speech

#34

Post by cld8483 »

lliamander wrote: post #31
kube-system wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The principles outlined in the Bill of Rights are within the context of a relationship with a government that uses force to apply their actions without any higher recourse. Losing a job is different in magnitude than being sentenced to death or imprisonment.

Anonymous accusations are easy to abuse. They should be treated with a skeptical eye regardless of the context. Any institution that makes decisions on such accusations is going to be rife with petty, vindictive politics.

Whenever an institution makes the decision to start taking anonymous accusations seriously, you can bet the bureaucracy of that institution has already been captured by precisely the sort of people who are eager to abuse such a system. To anybody else without such a malicious intent, the hazards of anonymous accusations should be obvious.

Be very careful when seeking to reform such a system, because those you are trying to disarm will use those very same bureaucratic weapons to stop you.

Re: Stanford faculty say anonymous student bias reports threaten free speech

#35

Post by cld8483 »

blindriver wrote: post #22
yodon wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When an anonymous accusation has the potential to be career ending for the accused, the simplistic assessment of relative power between parties ceases to be correct. This is why the constitution (which doesn't apply here but was very thoughtfully designed) requires that defendants be given the right to face their accusers. Valid accusations and false accusations happen in all forms of law. There are commonly power or…

Good point. I think at some point anonymity needs to be lifted regardless, maybe if the case is strong enough, or if the accusation appears to be fraudulent or in bad faith.

Not permitting the accused to know what they are being accused of is always done in bad faith.

If the accused were guilty, then they'd already know who the victim is and already know who the accuser is, so hiding the accuser does nothing. Hiding the accuser is only ""useful"" when the accused is actually innocent. The entire point of hiding the accuser is to deny the wrongfully accused of the opportunity to defend themselves. Such systems are weapons created by and for bureaucrats to cement their power.

Re: Stanford faculty say anonymous student bias reports threaten free speech

#36

Post by uoaei »

viscanti wrote: post #18
dragonwriter wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In all criminal prosecutions, ...not in non-criminal government actions, or in private contexts.

It appears the argument is that was included for a good reason for criminal cases and shows a precedent for it. The argument isn't that civil cases are currently covered, but that they should be.

Are these accusations being made to civil courts, or just in the public sphere? It doesn't sound like it's the former, so the 6th Amendment doesn't apply.

If we want to play the textualist game, there's nothing in the 1st Amendment about free speech only for people who identify themselves unambiguously. The 1st Amendment applies to anonymous speech, too (especially).

Re: Stanford faculty say anonymous student bias reports threaten free speech

#37

Post by wolpoli »

lliamander wrote: post #31
kube-system wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The principles outlined in the Bill of Rights are within the context of a relationship with a government that uses force to apply their actions without any higher recourse. Losing a job is different in magnitude than being sentenced to death or imprisonment.

Anonymous accusations are easy to abuse. They should be treated with a skeptical eye regardless of the context. Any institution that makes decisions on such accusations is going to be rife with petty, vindictive politics.

Yes. It is important to remain cautious of anonymous accusations since they can pave the way for the implementation of algorithmic prosecution or a zero tolerance policy.

Re: Stanford faculty say anonymous student bias reports threaten free speech

#38

Post by tengbretson »

freejazz wrote: post #33
WalterBright wrote: post #3

Anonymous accusations are a fine way to harass and intimidate anyone you disagree with or have a grudge against. As the article points out, it's a fine tool for oppression. A fundamental right we have in the US is the right to face our accusers, for good reason. Here's the text of it: > Sixth Amendment > In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury…

Key word: criminal prosecutions

"It's a private institution - They can quarter soldiers wherever they want."

Re: Stanford faculty say anonymous student bias reports threaten free speech

#39

Post by Nifty3929 »

WalterBright wrote: post #3

Anonymous accusations are a fine way to harass and intimidate anyone you disagree with or have a grudge against. As the article points out, it's a fine tool for oppression. A fundamental right we have in the US is the right to face our accusers, for good reason. Here's the text of it: > Sixth Amendment > In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury…

Yes, exactly. And I understand that you are not suggesting that Stanford is violating the 6th amendment, since this is not a criminal prosecution.

What you're saying is that Stanford should adopt the same line of reasoning embodied in the 6th amendment, to the extent that being accused in this fashion is a very high cost, and that the accuser should not be able to escape accountability for making false or misleading accusations. If the accuser thinks you did something wrong, they should stand up in public and say so.

Re: Stanford faculty say anonymous student bias reports threaten free speech

#40

Post by moronicQ »

afraid_to_speak wrote: post #4
WalterBright wrote: post #3

Anonymous accusations are a fine way to harass and intimidate anyone you disagree with or have a grudge against. As the article points out, it's a fine tool for oppression. A fundamental right we have in the US is the right to face our accusers, for good reason. Here's the text of it: > Sixth Amendment > In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury…

Isn't this is the actual issue? HR doesn't have to be upheld to the sixth amendment. If someone makes a complaint about me at work, I don't exactly have the right to know my accuser. The issue is that the people that now make up these corporations and various education administrations don't care about these protections people are granted when dealing with the federal government. Maybe they should be? That would be an…

[dead]
Post reply on HN