Thread

1. Havoc · 1790342300 · focus · HN ↗

   Sad that they feel this is necessary.

   Also feels like something that could be life ruining if someone innocent finds themselves on the list by mistake/fluke. This is presumably crowdsourced which is not bulletproof

   1. ElProlactin · 1790344034 · focus · HN ↗

      > Also feels like something that could be life ruining if someone innocent finds themselves on the list by mistake/fluke.

      Not as likely as you think. The reason a list like this feels necessary to many (presumably mostly) women is that in SV culture there's a presumption that these sorts of claims are almost always baseless. That these women engaged in consensual activities and either regretted it after the fact or were trying to make a buck.

      1. dude250711 · 1790345786 · focus · HN ↗

         Women get bitten by the vagueness of their own rules, since they want to keep all options open.

         If it was a strict 'no workplace dating ever' it would have been easier for everyone.

         1. AlecSchueler · 1790356971 · focus · HN ↗

            Somehow I've gotten through decades of working alongside women without having accidentally assaulted anyone. If you're unsure then use your words to ask.

            1. dude250711 · 1790358084 · focus · HN ↗

               The perpetrators will say "well, I asked her and she said 'yes'" and you get a "He said, she said" situation again.

               The rest will genuinely ask nicely and risk getting reported to HR for harassment.

               1. AlecSchueler · 1790403971 · focus · HN ↗

                  > The rest will genuinely ask nicely and risk getting reported ...

                  You're implying here that a significant number of women would want to report genuinely respectful men for an unstated reason.

                  Would you be able to posit a reason why so many would do this?

                  1. ElProlactin · 1790412091 · focus · HN ↗

                     Because the incel/manosphere narrative is that women are inherently dishonest and always looking to go after men for profit and/or spite.

                     These people simply do not want to believe that sexual harassment and assault really happen.

                  2. Eridanus2 · 1790487555 · focus · HN ↗

                     A bad day at work, for one. Women are human. You are relying on human judgement.
         2. ElProlactin · 1790357900 · focus · HN ↗

            > Women get bitten by the vagueness of their own rules, since they want to keep all options open.

            What does this even mean? Do you know how ridiculous you sound?

            > If it was a strict 'no workplace dating ever' it would have been easier for everyone.

            News flash: most companies have rules around relationships between superiors and subordinates. Such rules are only effective when they're respected and enforced.

            And what's your solution for "investors" who prey on female founders, tech millionaires and billionaires who use their reputations and influence to befriend women they later pounce on, etc.?

            1. dude250711 · 1790358431 · focus · HN ↗

               Look, I have no skin in this game. If you are happy with the status quo or have a better solution - be my guest.

               1. ElProlactin · 1790388389 · focus · HN ↗

                  Sure, dude. "Women get bitten by the vagueness of their own rules, since they want to keep all options open" sounds like a completely detached, "I have no skin in this game" argument. Eyeroll.

                  1. joebig · 1790486358 · focus · HN ↗

                     Converse in good faith.

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.