Author Topic: Twitter makes a Trust and Safety Council. Hires Anita Sarkeesian as a member. (Read 3532 times)

Muzzles56 · February 09, 2016, 06:09:20 PM

Quote from: ZSNO on February 09, 2016, 06:06:07 PM

HMM I WONDER WHY THEIR STOCK IS STILL DOING BAD?

at first i was like "i bet this is just a tiny drop compared to their overall performance"
holy forget you were not kidding, lower than ever. I thought twitter was super popular and successful...

Ad Bot · Advertisement

Juncoph · February 09, 2016, 06:12:22 PM

and to anyone who says "thats just a month, not representative of their real worth"

anita is really just a nail in the coffin

Nonnel · February 09, 2016, 06:13:13 PM

Quote from: Nonnel on February 09, 2016, 05:57:54 PM

wait so
where does it actually say this

JJJMan4 · February 09, 2016, 06:14:39 PM

Quote from: Nonnel on February 09, 2016, 06:13:13 PM

If you mean where Anita's hired then here:

Remurr · February 09, 2016, 06:16:27 PM

GOODBYE

Frequency · February 09, 2016, 06:17:45 PM

i'm not even surprised.

but hey at least those big mean bullies will get what's coming to them >:)))))))))

Akio- · February 09, 2016, 06:18:13 PM

Quote from: ultimamax on February 09, 2016, 06:09:06 PM

Source?

Even if you disagree with her politically she's definitely faced tons of legitimate harassment and death threats. That in itself qualifies her to be on this council.

being faced with harassment doesn't always mean you are able to deal with harassment

this person is known to be extremely irrational and stubborn especially when it comes to political stuff. when you have somebody like this who can and probably would disallow free speech, her being harassed for doing just that doesn't make her qualified for the job. especially since there shouldn't even be a job, this individual is a bad pick.

Frequency · February 09, 2016, 06:20:13 PM

Quote from: ultimamax on February 09, 2016, 06:09:06 PM

she's definitely faced tons of legitimate harassment and death threats.

hmm, wonder why.......

Quote from: ultimamax on February 09, 2016, 06:09:06 PM

That in itself qualifies her to be on this council.

well this council shouldn't exist

ZER� · February 09, 2016, 06:25:43 PM

Quote from: ZSNO on February 09, 2016, 06:06:07 PM

HMM I WONDER WHY THEIR STOCK IS STILL DOING BAD?

Holly stuff I was just about to post this, their stocks are falling faster than a 500lb man skydiving.

R.I.P Twitter 2016
The worst part is that this is a one way path because even if they want to fire her she will bring up more than a million reason why they can't then she will call up her lawyers.

Even if they do fire here she will then try her hardest to make Twitter look bad by victimizing herself.

Ipquarx · February 09, 2016, 06:27:17 PM

Quote from: ultimamax on February 09, 2016, 06:09:06 PM

Even if you disagree with her politically

Let me stop you there. Her "political beliefs" are literally human rights violations, that's how bad they are. They're so bad they're beyond the ability to respect them. I don't care how much she's been harassed, she's not fit to be on ANY council.

And no, she has not got "legitimate" death threats. She's got a bunch of internet trolls with absolutely no credibility to back them up. She's not "qualified" in the first place. She blocks literally anyone who criticizes her, there's no telling what other damage will be done with her on council. She's even asked the UN to ban her critics in one of the most laughably stupid attempts at censorship I've seen in a while: https://youtu.be/prmprJyPyv0

https://twitter.com/femfreq/status/533445611543363585

Shift Kitty · February 09, 2016, 06:28:21 PM

You know, being on said council doesn't just give her free reign. She still has to follow their standards. It's not like she'd been given admin on some CityRPG server.

Foxscotch · February 09, 2016, 06:29:19 PM

Quote from: ZER� on February 09, 2016, 06:25:43 PM

Holly stuff I was just about to post this, their stocks are falling faster than a 500lb man skydiving.

a 500lbs guy probably isn't gonna fall significantly faster than a 160lbs guy
whatever speed he may gain from mass he would probably lose from surface area

joe411 · February 09, 2016, 06:30:11 PM

Quote from: Foxscotch on February 09, 2016, 06:29:19 PM

a 500lbs guy probably isn't gonna fall significantly faster than a 160lbs guy
whatever speed he may gain from mass he would probably lose from surface area

Don't bring your science here!

ZSNO · February 09, 2016, 06:32:13 PM

Quote from: Foxscotch on February 09, 2016, 06:29:19 PM

a 500lbs guy probably isn't gonna fall significantly faster than a 160lbs guy
whatever speed he may gain from mass he would probably lose from surface area

you don't gain any speed for being more massive (when your reference is many magnitudes more massive than you), you gain more momentum though

Juncoph · February 09, 2016, 06:34:22 PM

Quote from: Foxscotch on February 09, 2016, 06:29:19 PM

a 500lbs guy probably isn't gonna fall significantly faster than a 160lbs guy
whatever speed he may gain from mass he would probably lose from surface area

you forget though that the rounder something becomes the more fat-sided the mass:SA ratio becomes