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

Lawyer lawyer lawyer LAWYER lawyer LAWYER

micheleincalifornia.blogspot.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 116 posts

Re: Lawyer lawyer lawyer LAWYER lawyer LAWYER

#41

Post by ted12345 »

spriggan3 wrote: post #22

> Men and women need to learn to interact at work I disagree, there is something called respect and politeness, if you need to learn it at work ,then your parents did a bad job raising you. Calling a woman "a milf" is inappropriate, period. I'm black, if a colleague called me "n__gger", would he need training so he can learn to interact at work with black people ? that's not serious. If the male employee was just a b…

Is calling a black person "nigger" really equivalent to calling a woman "milf"?

Somehow I think that analogy just confuses the issue.

Re: Lawyer lawyer lawyer LAWYER lawyer LAWYER

#42

Post by vacri »

Mendenhall wrote: post #18

I had read the original post and the comment you are referring to, but I did not post in the original thread. While I think you do have very valid points and definitely some words to consider. When I got to this line I paused. "Men and women need to learn to interact at work." While I think it is very true the question I asked myself is, should my company be the training ground for people to learn to get along ? The…

> Side note - I don't like the term terrorist being used so lightly.

Yet oddly, you're happy to use 'nuke them', and don't mention a problem with 'final solution' used in the exact same context as 'terrorist' was...

Re: Lawyer lawyer lawyer LAWYER lawyer LAWYER

#43

Post by kebolio »

svote1 wrote: post #23
pc86 wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, this guy that operates "The personal blog of Michele in California" and has basically her entire HN profile dedicated to the fact that she's a woman.

Gender is irrelevant when it comes to harassment. Men and women both can be harassed. Also, guy is gender neutral, it's 2016.

irrelevant to whether i agree with you or not, stating the current year is not a valid argument for change.

Re: Lawyer lawyer lawyer LAWYER lawyer LAWYER

#44

Post by donretag »

Clickbait. Pure and simple.

Not only that but sentences like "I appear to be the highest ranked openly female member there" appears to be a person obsessed with points, giving validity to clickbait.

I have enough points, go ahead a downvote. They do not translate into money.

Re: Lawyer lawyer lawyer LAWYER lawyer LAWYER

#45

Post by mschuster91 »

bargl wrote: post #37

Can I just say that I love how people are immediately jumping on the, LETS FUCKING NUKE THIS GUY bandwagon. How do we know the complaint was legitamate? Where is the scientific doubt? Where is the investigation? While I don't approve of the OP raking another HN user over the coals this publicly. She does make a GREAT point. Seek mediation, don't fire right away. She isn't saying don't get a lawyer, that's what HR wou…

> But that is in fact what adults do. They mediate, they don't act without doing research, finding context and getting both sides of the story. If the male says, "Well I never said that!" and you terminate his employment how is that an appropriate reaction?

Sorry, but that isn't true all too often.

We have seen both radfems and rad-MRAs starting shitstorms on the Internet over all kinds of stuff where a reasonable adult just thinks "what the fuck have they all been smoking", including SWATting, shitstorming employers, death threats, vile behavior etc.

I desperately wish that everyone calms down a lot and thinks before typing, but unfortunately, this is no longer possible: only maximum brutality will ensure publicity, no matter the costs.

Re: Lawyer lawyer lawyer LAWYER lawyer LAWYER

#46

Post by mjolk »

smoyer wrote: post #32
jasode wrote: post #8

>So, I am female. Yes, but here's the way I read it: "I am [a] female" and you provided one anecdote for us to consider. (E.g. Working relationship turned out fine for you in the end.) Nonetheless, I don't read it as "I represent females". My experience behind closed doors with HR about harassing males is to err on the side of termination. Sure, if a man makes 2 offers for a "drinks after work?" and the woman refuses…

"Sure, if a man makes 2 offers for a "drinks after work?" and the woman refuses" Turn that around ... if the woman is making the offer and the man refuses, he's likely to still feel flattered but the woman is likely to get the signal and move on. But ... many men are absolutely clueless and will never get that signal. On the other hand, if the man asks every day but goes no further, is that really sexual harassment o…

> if the woman is making the offer and the man refuses, he's likely to still feel flattered but the woman is likely to get the signal and move on.

I've had the opposite experience. I didn't feel flattered and she didn't get the hint.

>But ... many men are absolutely clueless and will never get that signal.

Weasel words. We're in Anecdote City right now.

>So I think part of this discussion needs to acknowledge that you can't write HR policy that will satisfy everyone.

The HR policies exist to prevent sexual harassment and to optimize for "safe against lawsuits." They're not supposed to make people satisfied or happy, they're there to protect the company.

Re: Lawyer lawyer lawyer LAWYER lawyer LAWYER

#47

Post by icebraining »

pc86 wrote: post #11
tmaly wrote: post #3

what is the beef with patio11 ? He has given my good comments on my posts over the years. That is how HN is designed.

You know how some people don't like other people who have found success? If your success is defined "lots of karma on HN" (as Mz's seems to be based on her profile) you're probably not going to be fond of those who are popular and generally well liked. Outside of YC employees and maybe tptacek, Patrick is one of the most prolific commentesr on HN, consistently provides a lot of objectively correct information, and is…

Nothing in her profile text allows you to make the inference that her grudge is based on jealousy of his karma and popularity. Even if you think that's likely, it's a pretty lousy thing to post publicly.

Re: Lawyer lawyer lawyer LAWYER lawyer LAWYER

#48

Post by Mendenhall »

smoyer wrote: post #38
Mendenhall wrote: post #18

I had read the original post and the comment you are referring to, but I did not post in the original thread. While I think you do have very valid points and definitely some words to consider. When I got to this line I paused. "Men and women need to learn to interact at work." While I think it is very true the question I asked myself is, should my company be the training ground for people to learn to get along ? The…

I tend to lean towards patio11's solution simply because the description of the perpetrator made him sound like someone who already failed to grasp the limits of the social contract. As for patio11's being sketchy, I think I've read everything he's written (starting on the Joel-on-Software forum) and while I don't agree with him on everything, I do believe he's got reasonable ethics and morals. Why use the word sketc…

Good points, I was only basing my information on what she said about her previous experience with him, based solely on that I think he sounds "sketchy" but also notice in the same line I put "but you know how internet rumors etc are."

I don't just take her opinion on him as fact, I have had no personal interaction with him nor do I draw the conclusion he is actually sketchy, I just take it as one persons opinion about another and know either and or both can be skewed because of past history.

Re: Lawyer lawyer lawyer LAWYER lawyer LAWYER

#49

Post by busterarm »

bargl wrote: post #37

Can I just say that I love how people are immediately jumping on the, LETS FUCKING NUKE THIS GUY bandwagon. How do we know the complaint was legitamate? Where is the scientific doubt? Where is the investigation? While I don't approve of the OP raking another HN user over the coals this publicly. She does make a GREAT point. Seek mediation, don't fire right away. She isn't saying don't get a lawyer, that's what HR wou…

FWIW, this industry as a whole tends to be trending away from adulthood.

Re: Lawyer lawyer lawyer LAWYER lawyer LAWYER

#50

Post by theandrewbailey »

Mendenhall wrote: post #18

I had read the original post and the comment you are referring to, but I did not post in the original thread. While I think you do have very valid points and definitely some words to consider. When I got to this line I paused. "Men and women need to learn to interact at work." While I think it is very true the question I asked myself is, should my company be the training ground for people to learn to get along ? The…

> I don't like the term terrorist being used so lightly.

Eh. It sort of confused me in the context. I think that something like "zero tolerance policy" would have been better.

Post reply on HN