Jon Ronson: How a Tweet Can Ruin Your Life • Hacker News Board

Re: Jon Ronson: How a Tweet Can Ruin Your Life

#301

Post by mkr-hn » Thu, Mar 05, 2015, 3:04 PM UTC

mercurial wrote: post #234

interpol_p wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would consider shaming them to be "fight," in this instance. I feel really bad for Hank, he totally did not deserve it. I also feel really bad that Adria felt so uncomfortable that she did something so rash. Both of their actions and reactions seem so natural to me. The upsetting thing is that our lack of diversity makes these situations so unavoidable.

> I would consider shaming them to be "fight," in this instance. More like shooting someone in the back. > I also feel really bad that Adria felt so uncomfortable that she did something so rash. That is where we differ. I do not believe her explanations. Not when she tweets the same kind of joke herself. > The upsetting thing is that our lack of diversity makes these situations so unavoidable. This particular situati…

> Everybody makes bad call. The difference is in how you handle your bad decisions, and what lessons you draw. Adria does not even begin to recognize that she acted wrongly towards these two guys, and generally gave a bad name to feminists.

Has she ever claimed to be a feminist?

Re: Jon Ronson: How a Tweet Can Ruin Your Life

#302

Post by tw04 » Thu, Mar 05, 2015, 3:05 PM UTC

adekok wrote: post #202

edent wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Remind me when someone was last killed at a tech conference like she says? Very rarely, if ever. I don't know of any killings, but there have been a number of (high profile) sexual assaults at tech conferences - see http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Timeline_of_incidents My friends say it's a regular (and sometimes terrifying) occurrence at some conferences. And I believe them.

Then she should be afraid of sexual assaults, not killings. And reading that page, I see most of the items are of this severity: > An offensive tweet was made against the PyLadies group Really? That's inappropriate, but it's not sexual assault. In fact, there are 14 instances of the word "assault". Which by my count is no more than 10% of the items. Over-exaggerating the problem is fear-mongering. This looks a lot li…

>Rosetta shirtgate

The fact the list contains that says everything I need to know about the list.

Re: Jon Ronson: How a Tweet Can Ruin Your Life

#303

Post by jellicle » Thu, Mar 05, 2015, 3:05 PM UTC

maxerickson wrote: post #208

near wrote: post #44

The world is replete with examples of why you should never use your real name with your online identity in any way (although in this case, the guy's employer found out over a photograph; which is even more troubling.) If there's anyone worse than Adria in this story, it's both Hank's and Adria's former employers. You don't destroy a person's life over a comment or a blackmail threat. But as they say, if corporations…

The many people who called for Hank to be fired and sent intimidation and threats and participated in the DDOS are all worse than both Hank and Adria. Hank's joke was perhaps inappropriate (it's impossible for those of us that were not there to even apply our own personal standards, volume, tone, etc. all factor into such things, and they are impossible to describe objectively). Adria's response is similarly hard to…

HN is extremely supportive of the mob justice meted out on uppity black women, and there are numerous supportive comments in this story thread to that effect. Most HN readers don't even see a problem there, much less one that needs any attention or remedy.

Sure, any rational examination of the situation would suggest that Adria's "offense" (saying something she didn't like was "not cool" on her personal Twitter account) was just about the most minor thing a human could possibly do, but the more important thing to HN is that she was a black woman challenging a white man, and that simply cannot be allowed to stand.

> The many people who called for Hank to be fired

Did anyone, at all, call for "Hank" to be fired? His name isn't even publicly known.

Re: Jon Ronson: How a Tweet Can Ruin Your Life

#304

Post by adekok » Thu, Mar 05, 2015, 3:06 PM UTC

Vula_Design wrote: post #134

moomin wrote: post #11

Let's be clear here, Jon Ronson spent a fair bit of time lying to Adria Richards to put together his book, his portrayal of the timeline is inaccurate and even if this wasn't the case it'd be a phenomenal amount of false equivalence: http://www.shakesville.com/2015/02/the-falsest-of-false-equi... TL;DR; Yeah he got fired, but he didn't get fired because of an internet backlash.

This article is the worst kind of inflammatory journalism. I would never attempt to deny that there is a systemic patriarchy in place, or that white privilege exists, but tying every perceived injustice in the world to these braoder issues undermines the real issues that affect millions of people on a daily basis. As has been pointed out here by many other commentors, the behaviour of Hank and his friend was clearly…

> I would never attempt to deny that there is a systemic patriarchy in place

I would.

There are a couple of counter-arguments. One, claiming that there is a "patriarchy" sounds a whole lot like a conspiracy theory. Replace "patriarchy" with "zionism" in typical statements to see what I mean. This makes me very wary of any hand-waving claims of "patriarchy".

The second is this:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15491274

Women have in-group preference. Men don't. The assumption that there's a "patriarchal" preference by white men for other white men is projection. What do I mean by this?

Most people believe that other people think like them. "I'm a reasonable person. So if I did X, it would be for reason Y. Therefore if other people are doing X, it's for reason Y."

i.e. Rich white men prefer to support other rich white men.

That just isn't true. There is no evidence for "in-group" preference of men. There is plenty of evidence that no such preference exists.

There is evidence for preference of power. If you can make Bill Gates money, he'll help you so long as it's in his favor. The second you can't help him, he'll cut your throat (metaphorically speaking), and leave you for dead.

The men who have such behavior tend to get ahead of people who aren't that ruthless. This isn't "in-group men" preference. It's cut-throat back-stabbing competition.

> Making her displeasure known to conference organisers was absolutely within her remit but turning herself into some sort of 'crusader' for a vague idea of 'rights and justice' in a public forum is problematic for me.

I agree. That's the crux of the matter. I suspect if she had only complained to the conference organizers, none of the rest would have happened. But she was clearly operating outside of the bounds of the conference herself.

And from the other links posted here, that wasn't the first time she did something like this.

Re: Jon Ronson: How a Tweet Can Ruin Your Life

#305

Post by kefka » Thu, Mar 05, 2015, 3:06 PM UTC

near wrote: post #44

The world is replete with examples of why you should never use your real name with your online identity in any way (although in this case, the guy's employer found out over a photograph; which is even more troubling.) If there's anyone worse than Adria in this story, it's both Hank's and Adria's former employers. You don't destroy a person's life over a comment or a blackmail threat. But as they say, if corporations…

Karma's a bitch. Backwards male-hating feminist gets what she dishes out, and she cannot take it "like a man". Pity.

Re: Jon Ronson: How a Tweet Can Ruin Your Life

#306

Post by TuringTest » Thu, Mar 05, 2015, 3:07 PM UTC

minot wrote: post #169

interpol_p wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's exactly it. We find it so hard to understand how that joke is threatening. It's almost impossible to imagine. It just sounds like a dumb joke. But look at how Adria describes her feelings in the article: “Have you ever had an altercation at school and you could feel the hairs rise up on your back?” she asked me. “You felt fear?” I asked. “Danger,” she said. “Clearly my body was telling me, ‘You are unsafe.’” I…

> I believe she actually felt like this. And that it is possible for women to feel this way at a conference heavily dominated by men. But we are oblivious to it, we can't even imagine how it feels. I can't imagine what it is like to crave for a cigeratte. If our industry were full of nonsmokers, would we then have to go out of our way to accommodate people who want to smoke in their offices? The joke wasn't directed…

> I can't imagine what it is like to crave for a cigeratte. If our industry were full of nonsmokers, would we then have to go out of our way to accommodate people who want to smoke in their offices?

In this case, the metaphor would be more accurate the other way around. If the industry were full of smokers, would it make sense for them to accommodate people who don't smoke? We definitely should, and we do, because secondhand smoke is damaging.

The person in the minority is the one that was being hurt. Restraining yourself from telling silly jokes won't hurt anyone; feeling threatened in an unsafe environment does, and this is how it is perceived an industry where women are in the minority. "Grow a thicker skin" is a legitimate reply up to the point where you accept them to tell you: "Right, but tone down your behavior". You can't expect the other party to be the only one to agree with everything you do, if you are not willing to concede something as well in return.

You can and should be able to set up as many private venues where you can behave in as rude ways as you want, as long as all people participating in them have accepted those norms. But at public places, open for all, it's good to know that there are expectations of polite behavior, and people should respect those limits.

> The joke wasn't directed at her. Her response was directed at him.

Quite right. That's why her behavior is not acceptable either, because the expected conduct between adults is to handle personal grievances in private. But the way she handled the situation doesn't make her concerns invalid, and we should not conflate the first with the second.

Re: Jon Ronson: How a Tweet Can Ruin Your Life

#307

Post by joshstrange » Thu, Mar 05, 2015, 3:07 PM UTC

outworlder wrote: post #39

I remember this episode well. Adria is more immature than the jokes that she supposedly got offended by. Let's ennumerate: - She overheard a conversation that wasn't directed at her. In the middle of a conference she was hopefully not coerced at attending and should be paying attention to the speaker - She took a picture of two people, without asking for permission - She twitted said picture with negative comments -…

I do not in any way condone what happened to her (It's sad I even have to say that), that said, I feel equal sympathy for her and she does for Hank which appears to be none. I'm not going to rehash all the reasons that what she did was wrong, I'm just going to call it like I see it: she fucked over Hank and didn't care the price he paid but then felt it was unfair when she was made to pay the same price.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: You have the right to free speech and your employer, peers, friends, etc have the right to react to your use of "free speech" it is not some suit of armor you can protect yourself in. I think (In terms of her losing her job NOT the backlash, death threats, etc) she got exactly what she deserved and her statement "if I had kids, I wouldn't tell jokes" (Really.... WTF) only confirms and cements my opinion. No remorse at all for her actions and "poor old me" routine stinks of BS.

None of this is meant to remove guilt from the company that fired Hank, that was a BS move on their part and they should have stood behind him or at least spent some time looking into it instead of firing him on the spot. That said, SendGrid was well within their rights, and I'd argue morally obligated, to kick her ass to curb. You can't fuck over developers (and don't think that the greater development community didn't see this as a near-personal attack on them as a whole) and expect to keep your job as developer evangelist. I know I'd never want to work with her or watch her speak at a conference.

Re: Jon Ronson: How a Tweet Can Ruin Your Life

#308

Post by e40 » Thu, Mar 05, 2015, 3:08 PM UTC

interpol_p wrote: post #92

near wrote: post #44

The world is replete with examples of why you should never use your real name with your online identity in any way (although in this case, the guy's employer found out over a photograph; which is even more troubling.) If there's anyone worse than Adria in this story, it's both Hank's and Adria's former employers. You don't destroy a person's life over a comment or a blackmail threat. But as they say, if corporations…

I don't think it's a lack of empathy. It feels like anger at a system that caters to men in a field she very much enjoys and wants to be included in. Unfortunately Hank happens to be a fairly good guy who is defended by this system and oblivious to it. He's an unintended casualty of her anger at something bigger. I had many of the same reactions as you when I read her words. But I've been trying very hard to imagine…

and to have someone sitting in earshot comfortably make jokes that make me feel threatened

I can understand angry, but not threatened. None of the comments I heard come close to a threat and everyone involved admits they weren't directed at her.

Re: Jon Ronson: How a Tweet Can Ruin Your Life

#309

Post by rebootthesystem » Thu, Mar 05, 2015, 3:08 PM UTC

People must be responsible for their actions. Without that society breaks down. Today the Internet is an amplifier of consequences, good or bad. A professional working in the industry isn't a professional if they are not in tune with this effect to guide their decision making.

It used to be:

"Don't write anything you would not want the world to see."

For many years this has expanded to:

"Don't write, say or do anything you would not want the world to see."

The side of the argument is inconsequential. Both parties chose to ignore the potential consequences of the Internet as an amplifier. We are not talking about grandma and grandpa here. We are talking about two Internet pro's.

Were the consequences fair?

Who knows? That is the nature of a positive feedback amplifier: It might not stop until something is destroyed. Ignoring it's existence could have one suffer disproportionate consequences. Don't ignore it.

Re: Jon Ronson: How a Tweet Can Ruin Your Life

#310

Post by Goronmon » Thu, Mar 05, 2015, 3:08 PM UTC

interpol_p wrote: post #168

byuu wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> jokes that make me feel threatened I really don't see how hearing two guys in a crowd of 800+ people talk about big dongles would make one feel threatened enough for a comment like, "Have you ever heard that thing, men are afraid that women will laugh at them and women are afraid that men will kill them?" She feared for her life over tasteless toilet humor in a crowded conference? Bullshit. Her Victorian sensibilit…

> I really don't see how hearing two guys in a crowd of 800+ people talk about big dongles would make one feel threatened enough for a comment like To her it's not 800+ people, it's 800+ men where you are one of the few women. That's not something I can say I've ever experienced. Personally I can't see how the joke is threatening, but I can't dismiss her feelings over this just because I find it tough — or even impos…

You claim it's histrionics, but it might be real things she is feeling. What if she really felt this way?

Her feelings being real don't make them acceptable or reasonable. Take the below example.

http://reason.com/blog/2015/02/19/male-student-banned-from-c...