Timeline for Stack Overflow is doing me ongoing harm; it's time to fix it!
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
11 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 25, 2019 at 20:52 | history | edited | This_is_NOT_a_forum | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Active reading.
|
| Oct 25, 2019 at 9:16 | comment | added | Doctor Jones | @mbloch, my point being, people are clutching at straws to try to rationalise why SE have suddenly started acting like this. It's only natural to ask yourself, "why has this thing that I love so much, started behaving in a way that betrays me and the rest of the community?". It's natural to assume they're all still good people, and their hands are tied in some way, but the fact of the matter is that good people do not behave like this. They do not bully an individual, safe in the knowledge that they've got the weight of a large company behind them to back them up. I don't have time for bullies | |
| Oct 25, 2019 at 9:13 | comment | added | Doctor Jones | @mbloch, I've seen many people suggest that SE have probably been advised by lawyers to not admit liability, but I think this is giving SE too much credit. The assumption here is that they know they've done something wrong, but I've seen no indication of that, especially from the behaviour of certain members of staff, as displayed by their social media. Unfortunately I think it's much more likely that the zealots think that everyone else is wrong, and are happy in their little bubble. | |
| Oct 24, 2019 at 15:04 | comment | added | Monica Cellio | Thanks; I appreciate it. You're definitely right that I needed to say that more prominently, so thanks for the prompt. | |
| Oct 24, 2019 at 14:51 | comment | added | mbloch | @MonicaCellio if my answer only served to have you update this into the question, then it reached its goal, and I hope this unlocks something in SE behavior. I keep rooting for you! | |
| Oct 24, 2019 at 14:37 | comment | added | Monica Cellio | I already said that in comments somewhere but that's hard to find, so I've updated my post. I've always assumed that remediation of the libel would be paired with an agreement not to sue for the libel, and the rest is just negotiating the details (acceptance criteria). | |
| Oct 24, 2019 at 13:40 | comment | added | ColleenV | I don’t think they believe removing Monica was a mistake. I think the only thing they regret is that they didn’t do it in a way that avoided the community noticing what they were up to. | |
| Oct 24, 2019 at 10:07 | comment | added | Daniel F | @mbloch she shouldn't be publicly making a public legal stand. Even this public statement via question is probably ill-advised. If she has demands, and wants them in the public space, then her lawyer should be making them. | |
| Oct 24, 2019 at 9:44 | comment | added | mbloch | I hear you. I am suggesting, for consideration by Monica, that they might be stonewalling because any attempt to communicate might lead them to weakening their hand legally. By having Monica communicate publicly her legal stand, she might reduce barriers to normalizing relations | |
| Oct 24, 2019 at 7:10 | comment | added | Wildcard | Since they haven't responded at all to her attempts to communicate with them privately, what exactly would she gain by publicly declaring such a willingness? Your suggestion is out of sequence. First they should actually establish a line (a channel of communication), and then she could clarify her position. While they are stonewalling her, there is no "easy path" to normalization. | |
| Oct 24, 2019 at 5:35 | history | answered | mbloch | CC BY-SA 4.0 |