"Mean tweets" is an interesting moment for "Twitter is not real life." Because in the real world, if a bunch of people you'll have to work with think you're a jerk due to past interactions, that's a normal reason not to hire you, esp. when there are other qualified candidates.
Some Twitter users presume it's not "real life," which means interactions on the platform don't count, so you can be as abrasive as you want and if anyone holds it against you offline they're wrong.
But in the Information Age, public parts of the internet very much are real life
As with the things I've written about cancel culture, I think the "mean tweets" thing is complicated, with the exact line hard to determine. How far is too far, and what should people let slide?
Either way, I disagree with those who argue from the position that any line is wrong.
Don't know. Haven't looked into it closely.
I'm disagreeing here with those arguing that Twitter behavior counting in job hiring is inherently unfair, and also with those arguing that if someone else got hired anyway we have to set the bar that low forever
I agree with the hypocrisy charge. Criticize away.
Where I disagree is when a hypocrisy charge strays into whataboutism, where someone you don't like wrongly saying it was okay in the past means we shouldn't set a higher standard now.
@codytfenwick @deviousbisexual
I don't think policy and personnel choices are analogous.
Hiring involves evaluating how well a candidate will be able to work with others, and various people's impressions of the candidate's past interactions are a factor in that.
Doesn't apply re: policy

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh

Keep Current with Nicholas Grossman

Nicholas Grossman Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!


Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @NGrossman81

21 Feb
US going after Oath Keepers:
-Shows the govt's taking Capitol attack seriously
-Reduces threat from these violent right-wing extremists who've demonstrated they'll attack America
-Shows no new domestic terrorism law needed; existing capabilities sufficient
All of these members of one militia getting charged with conspiracy highlights how the Capitol attack was, at least to some extent, pre-planned.
Every rationale for punishment applies: Balance a wrong, take violent people "off the streets," deter others from similar lawbreaking.
The Oath Keepers are especially concerning because they target military and law enforcement for recruitment, warping the concept of the oath to protect the public.
This makes them more dangerous than, say, the Proud Boys (not that the Proud Boys aren't dangerous; it's relative).
Read 6 tweets
21 Feb
This story of a librarian resigning from Smith College has gone viral, with many strong reactions. I'll once again caution everyone against taking a partial account and plugging it into preconceived culture war narratives, and otherwise offer no opinion.
Except for one thing.
If you have a positive or negative opinion about librarian Jodi Shaw's letter, racial sensitivity training, the way @bariweiss presented the story, etc., up to you.
But one thing stood out to me: the focus on Shaw wanting to rap in a presentation for students & being told no.
Making jokes that imagine a librarian awkwardly rapping? By all means.
But I've seen quite a few claims that Shaw rapping would be racist because she's white.
Really? It's 2021! Black Americans originated hip hop, but it's long since become a global artform. It's music!
Read 9 tweets
19 Feb
This is such a shallow take about the Middle East.
The US is deeply embedded in the region, whether we want it to be or not. The US has partners, military bases, security interests, business interests, more. It's built up over decades. Could change course, but a lot is locked in.
It might be satisfying, in an internet takester way, to say to the Middle East "go to hell, you're on your own, we're out," but that's a very stupid way to conduct foreign policy.
The US has been in for a long time, The world is too connected. Power vacuums can be very dangerous.
This doesn't mean the US can't change it's approach to the Middle East at all. Of course it can (and in some ways, I'd say should).
But if you think the US can just give Israel, Egypt, KSA, UAE, Bahrain, Jordan etc. the finger and it'll work out fine, you're not a serious person.
Read 4 tweets
15 Feb
Does anyone feel they can "speak freely" at work?
Maybe I'm weird, but I've always operated under the assumption that close friends and family are the people you speak freely around.
Do all of you love every boss you've ever had? And if not, did you regularly tell them they suck?
Charitable interpretation is for arguments, not surveys.
If different respondents interpret "speak freely" in different ways, then it's not a good question.
As a result, many of those commenting on this survey are primarily asserting their preconceptions.
Consider this:
In one org, everyone's a Shia Muslim with similar levels of religiosity. At another, there's people of various religions.
When religion comes up, people at the first org speak more freely.
But are they freer? Or just in a more homogenous environment? Is one better?
Read 4 tweets
14 Feb
James Damore's Google gender diversity memo is back in the news thanks to the NYT story about Slate Star Codex, and most get it wrong.
It's neither entirely sexist nor brave truth-telling. As I showed in @ArcDigi, it's deeply flawed scientific reasoning.
Damore's argument about gender and diversity in the tech industry is full of logical fallacies and misguided assumptions.
It reads more as a just-so story, in which he sees more men than women in tech, assumes that's natural, and goes looking for things to confirm his priors.
Damore & his defenders claim to be scientific by referencing studies that find differences between men & women on average.
But small average differences in the general population doesn't tell us anything about big differences in a non-representative sub-population (tech recruits)
Read 5 tweets
7 Feb
As someone whose main contribution to discussions of PC, cancel culture, etc. is criticizing catastrophizing, I’d like to say that a large group of NYT staffers declaring, in writing, that intent is irrelevant when evaluating speech is something worthy of philosophical pushback.
Intent isn’t the only relevant factor when evaluating speech. But it’s a factor.
Saying something isn’t the same as recounting what someone else said, esp not if the intent of recounting it is criticism.
Doesn’t mean you can’t criticize the recounting, just that it’s not the same
Consider “where are you from?” Identified as a microaggression in the US when the implication is “not America, so where really?”
But it’s also small talk, intending to get an answer like “Cleveland,” setting up chitchat about the Cavs or the rock and roll hall of fame or whatever
Read 5 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!