Timeline for Stack Overflow is doing me ongoing harm; it's time to fix it!
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
13 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 10, 2020 at 12:53 | history | bounty ended | USERNAME GOES HERE | ||
| Oct 25, 2019 at 20:50 | history | edited | This_is_NOT_a_forum | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Active reading. [<http://stackoverflow.com/legal/trademark-guidance> (the last section)].
|
| Oct 25, 2019 at 17:44 | comment | added | Mason Wheeler | @AGirlHasNoName "How do they erase the hurt without opening themselves to legal liabilities?" They don't. They've crossed a line--more than one, really--and incurred legal liability which must be paid. Right now the best course of action would be to minimize said liability rather than continuing to evade it, which will just make the problem bigger and bigger until it eventually catches up with them. | |
| Oct 24, 2019 at 8:24 | comment | added | Doctor Jones | @AGirlHasNoName "How do they erase the hurt without opening themselves to legal liabilities?". The legal liabilities do not matter! If SE want to fix this situation, and restore community trust, they need to fix this mess. The legal liabilities do not trump the damage they've done. | |
| Oct 24, 2019 at 4:52 | comment | added | Victor Stafusa | @Cyn I really didn't saw anything that remotely applies in a positive and concrete way to Monica's case. The best that I saw was either so broad and vague that could be applied to almost anyone or things that would likely be a result of a too much optimistic misinterpretation and wishful thinking. And of course, I'd also seen things that looks like as big fat lies from SE. Given the tone she used in this very question, I really doubt that there seems to be anything optimistic here. For me, it looks like that the best that SE is trying to do is to just be more careful, not be any better. | |
| Oct 24, 2019 at 4:38 | comment | added | Cyn | @VictorStafusa There are staff statements in the comments of various posts. They can't be searched for but some of the Meta posts link to them here and there. Even this question has a few such links. | |
| Oct 24, 2019 at 4:32 | comment | added | Victor Stafusa | "Until they fix this, none of the rest of this is going to work. They want her to apply to be reinstated and they've hinted that it will happen (no guarantees though...maybe they have other plans)." - I didn't seen anything like that she might be reinstated coming from anyone in SE's staff. What I saw is very much the opposite, that since "the register" chapter of this fiasco, everyone in staff is avoiding to mention anything about her as a taboo, and when having no choice other than doing that, they do it in the most minimal way possible. | |
| Oct 24, 2019 at 4:27 | comment | added | Cyn | @BenVoigt That's a good example of why I'm not qualified to answer AGirl's question. Hopefully their lawyers will tell them how to right this wrong and guide them to making it happen (yes, I'm still fantasizing). | |
| Oct 24, 2019 at 4:24 | comment | added | Ben Voigt | @Cyn: No, "regretting" the Register article would not be helpful. Just like all the responses so far, that smacks of "we're sorry we got caught but we're not sorry we did it". A full correction of every attack levied in public is necessary. | |
| Oct 24, 2019 at 4:15 | comment | added | user384163 | I agree. For wiser minds than I. | |
| Oct 24, 2019 at 4:14 | comment | added | Cyn | @AGirlHasNoName It's a very good question. And one I'm not qualified to answer. A public statement regretting the Register article and anything they've publicly said using Monica's name would be an excellent start though. They can't erase the hurt. Hurt is hurt. This is about public reputation. | |
| Oct 24, 2019 at 4:04 | comment | added | user384163 | How do they repair the damage? Because I want that too. How do they erase the hurt without opening themselves to legal liabilities? That's the million-dollar question. | |
| Oct 24, 2019 at 3:47 | history | answered | Cyn | CC BY-SA 4.0 |