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

Shame Storm

firstthings.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 247 posts

Re: Shame Storm

#191

Post by 1999 »

zozbot123 wrote: post #13

The rule for how to deal with this sort of "shaming" is quite simple: no matter what you may have been 'accused' of, always double down and never issue anything that might even loosely resemble an apology or an admission of weakness, no matter what the costs might be. Then simply wait until the mob gets bored and moves on to the next easy target. There are very high profile examples of this working quite well, but me…

Never explain never apologise.

My advice to anyone would be don't make even the slightest effort to please people who hate you.

Re: Shame Storm

#192

Post by nebulous1 »

moduspol wrote: post #174
beat wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem with Kavanaugh isn't what he did as a drunken teenager. It's what he did as a sober adult - his angry, petulant outbursts at senators . A Supreme Court seat isn't just a question of experience or background. It's a question of temperament. Even if he was completely innocent (and being too drunk to remember or too arrogant to think it important isn't the same as innocent), he should have been completely ca…

Again: It is now objective fact that at least four of his accusers were lying, so we're legitimately evaluating how someone should react when being questioned surrounding false sexual assault and rape allegations after being in the media spotlight for weeks. Many of these senators opposed his nomination prior to his name even being selected, yet you're expecting him to sit back non-chalantly as senators try to trick…

I don't think they should have dropped him for simply being controversial.

That said, which four have been shown to be lying? Only Munro-Leighton has admitted lying outright, and Swetnick changed her statement enough that you could say she was lying too. And Munro-Leighton admitted she wasn't actually the original Jane Doe accuser anyway.

I do believe something happened with Blasey Ford, although ultimately I don't know if her memory of the events will fully gel with what happened, or with what Kavanagh thought was happening at the time.

Yes, I would have expected him to keep his cool even under such intense pressure. I wouldn't expect you or I would be able to do so, but I wouldn't put either of us forward for a lifetime position on the US supreme court either.

Ignoring his composure, a bigger issue for me is that he outright lied about his drinking at the time and the meaning of many phrases used in his yearbook. Renate Alumnus just meant they were all good friends? Boof is farting and devils triangle is a drinking game? These are simply lies, and not even good ones. I don't think the existence of lewd comments in his yearbook is disqualifying, but lying about them should be.

Re: Shame Storm

#194

Post by gowld »

gknoy wrote: post #109
jstewartmobile wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not joking. That, and it doesn't require toughness so much as good aim: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeffrey_Hudson#Duel_and_disast... I'd much rather roll the dice with duelling again than introduce some new, elaborate, and untested form of social engineering.

Dueling implies that someone who is _better at one thing_ (hurting others) is inherently Right. It also means that someone who is sufficiently good at such things can act as a bully. Dueling introduces personal risk for libelous claims, but it _also_ introduces the same risk for those who are making true claims. People already fear the people that hurt them; giving them a legally supported way of hurting them even mo…

#1 The challenge, demand satisfaction. If they apologize, no need for further action

#3 Have your seconds meet face to face, negotiate a peace or negotiate a time and place. This is commonplace, ‘specially ‘tween recruits. Most disputes die and no one shoots.

#8 Your last chance to negotiate. Send in your seconds, see if they can set the record straight.

Re: Shame Storm

#195

Post by gowld »

monkeydreams wrote: post #181

This article, if written by someone else, might be more impactful for me. This is the story of a woman who fled half-way across the world from a Twitter-storm, but who, when confronted by a refugee who had been shot and tortured in his home country, that his suffering did not mean he had the right to seek asylum. This is a woman who admires Marine Le Pen and Trump, but is happy to seek her own asylum when a minor shi…

Stories like this are collected at reddit.com /r/selfawarewolves

Re: Shame Storm

#196

Post by matt4077 »

AcerbicZero wrote: post #142
BryantD wrote: post #37

I have a pretty simple algorithm for articles about the dangers of public shaming. If they fail to catalog GamerGate and the online shaming of Zoe Quinn as an example of the problem, they are probably not a balanced look at the phenomenon. I find Justine Sacco's case is a reasonable metric for the other half of the equation.

My understanding of the GG drama was that it started fairly unsavory, but rapidly became about something entirely unrelated to Zoe and her relationships. The reaction from the gaming media organizations being accused of serious (if video games can be serious) lapses of journalistic integrity, complete with multiple examples of it just poured fuel onto the fire. After that, I stopped following it, but it does seem tha…

Funny, how the misogynistic mob finds a defender here, seeing the good within the hate. Meanwhile, the dozens of incidents cited of sexists and racists rarely get more than a "I, too, believe this is the end of free speech".

Re: Shame Storm

#197

Post by moduspol »

nebulous1 wrote: post #192
moduspol wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Again: It is now objective fact that at least four of his accusers were lying, so we're legitimately evaluating how someone should react when being questioned surrounding false sexual assault and rape allegations after being in the media spotlight for weeks. Many of these senators opposed his nomination prior to his name even being selected, yet you're expecting him to sit back non-chalantly as senators try to trick…

I don't think they should have dropped him for simply being controversial. That said, which four have been shown to be lying? Only Munro-Leighton has admitted lying outright, and Swetnick changed her statement enough that you could say she was lying too. And Munro-Leighton admitted she wasn't actually the original Jane Doe accuser anyway. I do believe something happened with Blasey Ford, although ultimately I don't k…

> That said, which four have been shown to be lying?

I posted a separate source for each of the four above. The two you're missing are the "rape on a boat" allegation and the woman who initially corroborated Ford's allegation on Facebook before backtracking after questions arose.

Keep in mind that at the time, the pressure was on to just drop him as a mere result of a large number of allegations. These allegations weren't intended to stand up to scrutiny--just to mount political pressure to drop him.

> I do believe something happened with Blasey Ford, although ultimately I don't know if her memory of the events will fully gel with what happened, or with what Kavanagh thought was happening at the time.

Agreed.

> Yes, I would have expected him to keep his cool even under such intense pressure.

I think he was in a no-win situation. If he had kept his cool, he would have appeared inhumanly cold. It would have been spun as him being uncaring and confident he's getting away with his sexual assaults.

That's kind of why I find this so disgusting, though. This is essentially the "new normal" of high-stakes politics. You're going to be put under a microscope as we hang "potential gang rapist" around your neck for weeks, and then win or lose, we'll move onto the next news cycle without even acknowledging how explicit this character assassination was, or the effect on future nominations.

And there will still be people who don't see this as reprehensible.

> Boof is farting and devils triangle is a drinking game?

Devil's triangle did end up being a drinking game, though [1]. It's not even weird or unexpected that high school boys would name a game after an explicit sexual act.

That the rest are being grouped in under "presumed lies" isn't fair, either, and the fact that this stuff is even being discussed is more an indictment of this circus of a process than the judge. We can expect future candidates to keep as many secrets as possible, be as vague as possible in answers, and we're all worse off for it.

[1] https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/devils-triangle-drin...

Re: Shame Storm

#198

Post by zozbot123 »

matt4077 wrote: post #196
AcerbicZero wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My understanding of the GG drama was that it started fairly unsavory, but rapidly became about something entirely unrelated to Zoe and her relationships. The reaction from the gaming media organizations being accused of serious (if video games can be serious) lapses of journalistic integrity, complete with multiple examples of it just poured fuel onto the fire. After that, I stopped following it, but it does seem tha…

Funny, how the misogynistic mob finds a defender here, seeing the good within the hate. Meanwhile, the dozens of incidents cited of sexists and racists rarely get more than a "I, too, believe this is the end of free speech".

Defend the misogynistic mob? That's exactly what parent did not do. Indeed, the unsavory, /v/ element was always a huge liability for GG as a social phenomenon, and I don't know of anyone who would even attempt to deny this.

Re: Shame Storm

#199

Post by mcguire »

monkeydreams wrote: post #181

This article, if written by someone else, might be more impactful for me. This is the story of a woman who fled half-way across the world from a Twitter-storm, but who, when confronted by a refugee who had been shot and tortured in his home country, that his suffering did not mean he had the right to seek asylum. This is a woman who admires Marine Le Pen and Trump, but is happy to seek her own asylum when a minor shi…

I admit I am a little curious about what she thought about living in Australia.

Re: Shame Storm

#200

Post by mcguire »

AcerbicZero wrote: post #142
BryantD wrote: post #37

I have a pretty simple algorithm for articles about the dangers of public shaming. If they fail to catalog GamerGate and the online shaming of Zoe Quinn as an example of the problem, they are probably not a balanced look at the phenomenon. I find Justine Sacco's case is a reasonable metric for the other half of the equation.

My understanding of the GG drama was that it started fairly unsavory, but rapidly became about something entirely unrelated to Zoe and her relationships. The reaction from the gaming media organizations being accused of serious (if video games can be serious) lapses of journalistic integrity, complete with multiple examples of it just poured fuel onto the fire. After that, I stopped following it, but it does seem tha…

I'm afraid I only saw the GG thing after it had stopped being about journalistic integrity and video games (whatever the hell that is). Unsavory is a pretty mild description.
Post reply on HN