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

Men are hitting on my scheduling bot because it has a woman's name

askamanager.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 82 posts

Re: Men are hitting on my scheduling bot because it has a woman's name

#51

Post by akoboldfrying »

randomdata wrote: post #43
akoboldfrying wrote: post #42

>Obviously, this would be inappropriate behavior if it was happening to an actual human assistant, and I would deal with it. Unless one person has some level of authority over the other, I don't see why this should be considered inappropriate. Not taking no for an answer, or any kind of retribution for being declined, are harassment and shouldn't be tolerated -- but just asking? I think that's something any man or wo…

> But I don't see it as morally repugnant. It is not seen as morally repugnant, it is seen as economically repugnant. If you were the server admin for a business and an old lady came in off the street asking if you would help her fix her computer, it is likely your boss would step in to put a stop to that too. The employer doesn't want to pay you to do things for other people. If the old lady came to your house inste…

If I understand you correctly, your objection to asking people out at work is that it wastes company time?

If so, this is a really interesting argument that I've never come across before. I do agree that it wastes company time, but I would think in such small quantities that it had very little impact -- on par with having a 5 minute chat with your office mate about their weekend.

I still have the impression that for many people who do object to this sort of thing, their objection stems from a feeling that being asked out at work is an uncomfortable or even frightening thing, something a person should not have to be subjected to.

Re: Men are hitting on my scheduling bot because it has a woman's name

#52

Post by bugglebeetle »

alexey-salmin wrote: post #37
bugglebeetle wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn’t argue against it in general, just for the case of people who pester service staff in pursuit of sexual gratification. I don’t think that’s a cultural issue, so much as one of individual boorishness.

Seeing "boorishness" and "pursuit of sexual gratification" as inherently bad things is indeed a cultural phenomenon. There are cultures that explicitly reward one or both of these.

The problem is the combination of the two, although the former is discouraged most everywhere. Being a pest is not a matter of culture, but an individual choice.

Re: Men are hitting on my scheduling bot because it has a woman's name

#54

Post by Martinussen »

akoboldfrying wrote: post #42

>Obviously, this would be inappropriate behavior if it was happening to an actual human assistant, and I would deal with it. Unless one person has some level of authority over the other, I don't see why this should be considered inappropriate. Not taking no for an answer, or any kind of retribution for being declined, are harassment and shouldn't be tolerated -- but just asking? I think that's something any man or wo…

Someone at work in a customer-facing role is less free to handle these things like they want to, potentially at the risk of very real consequences to their job. If you work at a bar, or a mechanic's shop, or in the grocery checkout, a customer throwing a fit and spitefully getting your boss/management involved can lead to anything from straight up losing your job to just being a "difficult" worker and not getting the shifts you need.

If the people are not total strangers, it's different, but approaching someone that didn't volunteer to be in the situation, and can't freely respond, is absolutely inappropriate a lot of the time - I'd argue, at least.

(Obviously, a good employer should help you feel protected and safe in situations like this - but we all know that is not a choice many people get to make for themselves)

Re: Men are hitting on my scheduling bot because it has a woman's name

#56

Post by resolutebat »

6R1M0R4CL3 wrote: post #53

if some men did, it is not acceptable to write "men are hitting" because not all men are doing that. at minimum this is dishonest if not misandry.

The statement is true as long as all the people doing the hitting are men.

"Woman stoned to death by men" does not imply all men stone women to death.

Re: Men are hitting on my scheduling bot because it has a woman's name

#58

Post by jauco »

resolutebat wrote: post #16

I used to work on a support team where a bot could solve simple cases: eg. if the user's software license had just expired, it would grant an immediate one-off 24 hour extension so the user could get their payments sorted. The fun bit is that it would reply to the case using a female name, using the same kind of account as human support reps. The bot's customer satisfaction surveys were over the top effusive, includi…

This needn't be because of the female name though, does it? A bot is generally very fast and if it was programmed right it might just be a very good experience for the end-users.

Did the ratings change after the bot got a male name?

Re: Men are hitting on my scheduling bot because it has a woman's name

#59

Post by randomdata »

akoboldfrying wrote: post #51
randomdata wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But I don't see it as morally repugnant. It is not seen as morally repugnant, it is seen as economically repugnant. If you were the server admin for a business and an old lady came in off the street asking if you would help her fix her computer, it is likely your boss would step in to put a stop to that too. The employer doesn't want to pay you to do things for other people. If the old lady came to your house inste…

If I understand you correctly, your objection to asking people out at work is that it wastes company time? If so, this is a really interesting argument that I've never come across before. I do agree that it wastes company time, but I would think in such small quantities that it had very little impact -- on par with having a 5 minute chat with your office mate about their weekend. I still have the impression that for…

> If I understand you correctly, your objection to asking people out at work is that it wastes company time?

No. Why would I have any feelings towards what other people do? That doesn't make any sense.

The quote is written from an economic perspective. If 'Emily' were real and a random person the author had never met, there would be no concern or attempt to stand in. Allison is concerned because they would have 'Emily' on the clock. It impacts Allison directly.

The cost in the case in the bot, despite being the exact same act, is so small it is immeasurable. As such, we get a 'funny anecdote' instead.

Re: Men are hitting on my scheduling bot because it has a woman's name

#60

Post by akoboldfrying »

Martinussen wrote: post #54
akoboldfrying wrote: post #42

>Obviously, this would be inappropriate behavior if it was happening to an actual human assistant, and I would deal with it. Unless one person has some level of authority over the other, I don't see why this should be considered inappropriate. Not taking no for an answer, or any kind of retribution for being declined, are harassment and shouldn't be tolerated -- but just asking? I think that's something any man or wo…

Someone at work in a customer-facing role is less free to handle these things like they want to, potentially at the risk of very real consequences to their job. If you work at a bar, or a mechanic's shop, or in the grocery checkout, a customer throwing a fit and spitefully getting your boss/management involved can lead to anything from straight up losing your job to just being a "difficult" worker and not getting the…

Thanks for responding. We might be mostly in agreement: I think the employee's concerns that you mention are genuine and important, but I see the root cause being some combination of the customer's and the boss's choices -- the customer being spiteful is the kind of retribution I consider harassment, and to the extent that they act that way because they're confident the boss will reflexively take their side, an abuse of power, though the boss also shares responsibility there. If both would instead behave like reasonable adults, declining an invitation would pose no threat to the employee's job security, and there would be no need to (formally or informally) regulate it.

I realise that that "if" isn't helpful to someone who has to deal with a reality where it doesn't (or even just might not) hold. But the point I want to make is that a culture in which we expect by default that the customer and boss will be reasonable, and shame them if they aren't, is just as possible as a culture where we expect by default that no one should ever ask anyone out at work, and shame them if they do. I often see people express things (like the sentence I quoted in my original comment) that nudge society further in the direction of the latter, but I think the former is better for everyone. Let's nudge it that way instead.

Post reply on HN