zlacker

[return to "'Stupid,' 'shameful:' Tech workers on Y Combinator CEO Garry Tan's rant"]
1. tempes+EM[view] [source] 2024-02-02 09:22:28
>>Strato+(OP)
I'm a little bit aghast at all the comments saying this is normal or no big deal. Maybe it is normal (or at least common), but it shouldn't be. If you believe it's no big deal, I can't agree. I can see this kind of behaviour from adolescents, but adults should understand that words are meaningful and have consequences, and that even if you disagree with someone, they're still a human being who deserves some modicum of respect, or at least decency. Wishing a slow death on someone, even rhetorically, shows neither, to put it mildly.
◧◩
2. ignora+f81[view] [source] 2024-02-02 13:10:24
>>tempes+EM
> normal

It isn't normal for anyone else, of course. As for Garry, he is heavily invested in SF politics.

> no big deal

It is a big deal only if Garry was consistently inflammatory. Otherwise, it can be safely relegated to careless jibe by a drunkard.

> words are meaningful and have consequences

True, but one is allowed to retract, excuse, apologize. One incident unto drastic consequences will result in heavy-handedness wielded often, a weaponization against anyone standing upto establishment or established norms (which is quite contrary to what either the left or the right would want, in the context of political discourse).

> adolescents, but adults

Are we being too sensitive, vindictive, projecting remorse? One look at tech Twitter (and deleted tweets) and we'd want to cancel them all. What good is that going to bring, other than create an inescapable and ever shrinking echo chamber?

> some modicum of respect, or at least decency

Politics gets dirty from time to time.

> Wishing a slow death on someone, even rhetorically

There is probably a socio-political climate in which such statements could be considered incitement, but in this case, lunatics using Garry's words to threaten and scare their victims is exactly that... a work of an opportunist lunatic who probably thinks highly of themself. That isn't on Garry.

◧◩◪
3. justin+Lq2[view] [source] 2024-02-02 19:34:58
>>ignora+f81
> Are we being too sensitive, vindictive, projecting remorse? One look at tech Twitter (and deleted tweets) and we'd want to cancel them all. What good is that going to bring, other than create an inescapable and ever shrinking echo chamber?

It's simply nonsensical to think that there are two extremes of discourse, "echo chamber" and "people can feel free to voice threats," which are in opposition.

> It is a big deal only if Garry was consistently inflammatory. Otherwise, it can be safely relegated to careless jibe by a drunkard.

People on the business end of a threat certainly have a different perspective on what can be "safely relegated" to the "don't worry" category. There's nothing wrong with taking into account the perspective of those being threatened when determining whether something like this is a "big deal," as the parent poster presumably did, and as the law does.

> It isn't normal for anyone else, of course. As for Garry, he is heavily invested in SF politics.

How unique he is. It's hard to imagine a reality where lots of people are heavily invested in politics and behave foolishly because of it. That would be an alternate reality that is difficult to imagine.

[go to top]