Ellen Pao owes Kleiner Perkins $276,000 for lawsuit costs: judge • Hacker News Board

Re: Ellen Pao owes Kleiner Perkins $276,000 for lawsuit costs: judge

#171

Post by BinaryIdiot » Thu, Jun 18, 2015, 4:29 PM UTC

obstinate wrote: post #154

BinaryIdiot wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You said that women don't catch heat Please take a look at my original comment as I did not say that. Women catch heat all the time. All I said was, in my experience, I rarely see it when compared to all of the sexual harassment they receive. > To catch heat (without a cause) I haven't seen this phrase used without a "cause"; isn't that just an insult? Can you even "catch heat" without doing anything?

"I rarely see women get 'heat' on Reddit." -- You. I understand now that you were making a comparative statement, but at the time I believed you were making an absolute one.

> "I rarely see women get 'heat' on Reddit." -- You

I'm not sure why you're quoting that; it doesn't support your assertion. Rarely does not mean an absolute don't.

> I understand now that you were making a comparative statement, but at the time I believed you were making an absolute one.

Even if it was absolute I was certainly highlighting a problem with women being sexual harassed on Reddit which you still somehow took as me thinking it's desirable. Worst yet you never corrected your mistake within the editing window so my comment is being downvoted to hell and people probably think I'm supporting the sexual harassment of women.

Re: Ellen Pao owes Kleiner Perkins $276,000 for lawsuit costs: judge

#172

Post by BinaryIdiot » Thu, Jun 18, 2015, 4:35 PM UTC

obstinate wrote: post #144

BinaryIdiot wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> To catch heat means roughly the same thing as to catch flak Correct. > In other words, to be complained about/insulted/whatever. No, that's not what that means. To catch heat or flak is angering / upsetting others due to your actions then being on the receiving of said anger. It has nothing to do with one sided insults.

Not necessarily due to your actions, nor due to wrong actions. Pao is catching heat/flak over removing comments (which there is zero evidence of) or extortion and lying (which suing someone and losing is not) and over banning harassmemt/hate subs (which decision she announces and likely had a hand in, but was a right action).

Maybe it's a cultural thing but I've never seen the phrases "catching heat / catching flak" used when it's not in return of an action (I don't see any official definitions online either but as far as I can tell it's in return of some sort of action). What you're describing just sounds like typical insulting / disparagement.

I don't really know how much evidence is in any of those claims (I thought there was supposedly evidence, not zero, but I really don't care enough to bother looking anyway) as I never really wanted to talk or even fight about anything relating to Pao but I could see that changing the context for catching heat / flak if there is or isn't evidence.

Re: Ellen Pao owes Kleiner Perkins $276,000 for lawsuit costs: judge

#173

Post by hoopd » Thu, Jun 18, 2015, 5:12 PM UTC

obstinate wrote: post #169

mrbtie wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have any reason to believe that name-calling is the optimal way to "remove the bad actors from the conversation"? In my experience, its only likely outcome is the destruction of potentially healthy debate.

There is nothing potentially healthy about the kind of smear campaign happening in this thread. If we saw no discussion of her husband, the posts that she did not actually remove, or claims that she extorted kp or lied about things that happened, then maybe.

This is why you are part of the problem.

It's reasonable to say his personal life should be left out but in your anger you've moved that line to a point where it prevents important information from entering the discussion.

Re: Ellen Pao owes Kleiner Perkins $276,000 for lawsuit costs: judge

#174

Post by hoopd » Thu, Jun 18, 2015, 5:14 PM UTC

obstinate wrote: post #160

danbolt wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you don't mind me asking, perhaps you could give a reason why you feel this isn't always the optimal approach? I can certainly understand that it's not exactly the most pleasant thing to do at times, but I feel as though it's an ideal where the side effects of striving for it are beneficial. It would mean a lot of me to hear your take on it.

Of course I do not mind. I believe ostracization and marginalization have historically been more effective for this type of objectionable opinion. The main differentiating factor is that misogyny is not rooted in reason. Thus, reason is an ineffective tool for attacking it, especially on the internet.

I'm not saying misogyny is rooted in reason, I'm saying the social justice movement has a habit of misclassifying opposing viewpoints as misogyny in order to dismiss them.

Re: Ellen Pao owes Kleiner Perkins $276,000 for lawsuit costs: judge

#175

Post by 001sky » Thu, Jun 18, 2015, 5:14 PM UTC

obstinate wrote: post #148

001sky wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But that just shows you don't understant the relevant word(s) and/or you haven't done any homework (like read even the cover page) on the trustee report.

Why would I read that? A trustee report isn't nor can it be a conviction. And it also has nothing to do with Ellen Pao, the person we are discussing.

1) A nexus with a civil fraud case.

2) That is fundamental due dilligence for any fiduciary appointment.

3) A criminal conviction is un-neccessary to prove civil fraud in relation to (1,2).

(Those are legitimate issues/topics of dicsussion).

Re: Ellen Pao owes Kleiner Perkins $276,000 for lawsuit costs: judge

#176

Post by neildot » Thu, Jun 18, 2015, 5:23 PM UTC

obstinate wrote: post #95

BinaryIdiot wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure that's accurate. I rarely see women get "heat" on reddit but once someone identifies as a women they seem to get far more comments, many even sexual. I'd say women get hit on versus catching heat.

Dear lord. Are you telling me you believe unsolicited sexual advances in response to any non-sexual thing one might post is desirable to women? News flash: it ain't. If you think that women aren't treated badly on Reddit, go to /R/shitredditsays. If you have a problem with the politics of that group, you need not read the comments. Just peruse the linked posts. A pattern quickly begins to emerge.

If they make a point of advertising they're a woman, yes.

http://i.imgur.com/3TY3Aya.png