Our fundamental right to shame and shun the New York Times

Post by krageon » Mon, Mar 28, 2022, 7:30 AM UTC

Forgeties79 wrote: post #625

krageon wrote: post #622

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> [...] it is the company's problem as well. Respectfully, I think with these paragraphs you've established that in this situation it's primarily your problem. The environment was there before you came around and clearly it worked well enough to keep things afloat, so unless you are the one person on earth with the skills you have it is not the company's problem.

Respectfully, it is primarily the company’s problem by law. https://www.techrepublic.com/article/hostile-work-environmen...

Post by RobertRoberts » Wed, Mar 30, 2022, 5:20 AM UTC

Latty wrote: post #616

RobertRoberts wrote: post #477

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe you could provide a solid point of "the actual harm done" when someone says "there are nazis in the army"? (if it's true) If it's false, maybe you can claim slander on an entire army? Even the law doesn't protect anyone from that...

The harm done is very clear: the indented implication that Ukraine is controlled by Nazis is intended to justify Russia's illegal and unjustified war which is about control by Russia, and helps no one in Ukraine.