You're inspired by DHH but as history teach us, sites like this are mostly abused with fakes, and that's my only problem regarding your website. Why? Anon comments. If DHH will be accused of disinformation he will not shrug this off very easily...
I have a friend I talk to daily for 5+ hours a day that works for a major UC school in California.
They can totally work from home and everyone kept passing the buck when pressed about this.
The other day the staff got pissed enough they got a answer.. Basically the IT staff is not all that great and the VPN doesn't work so they are having people come into the office while they know they should be working from home.
Heard the exact complaint from two friends in academia. Seems reasonable given my own stint in the university system. Not known for being anywhere near modern.
I dunno, if a twitter mob can wreck a company for posting something bad about <insert protected group> then I'd imagine a dedicated site with enough traffic could do likewise.
You bring up a good point. Why take time managing and running the resources for such a site when you can just let Twitter do the hard work for you. You just provide the "face" of it.
Because this site doesn't have any author, privacy policy is just some template, etc. You don't see any difference between anon website & comments, and industry leader? :)
- Ripe for abuse: There is always some angry customer or (ex-)employee seeking revenge. Especially anonymous forums are problematic. Most of the information may be wrong or intentionally false, or highly perspectival, missing the bigger picture, etc.
- Blaming without discussion promotes vigilantism, sending the wrong signal to society. There should be a discussion of both sides of the story and a way for the other side to justify their actions.
- Ulterior motives of such sites are hard to figure out. They could be run for political goals, by adversaries, competition, etc. How do you know? Is it controlled by an authority?
- High potential for laws suits and subpoenas. The line between legitimate complaints and libel is thin.
- If the action to be blamed is illegal, then authorities should handle it. If it's not illegal, then maybe what looks like a legitimate complaint for the maker of the site is just a matter of perspective (or, to put it worse, ideology).
- The sites are adversarial by design, which is principally the wrong perspective. All they do is alienate one group from another, when in fact often both groups need to cooperate to solve the issue.
That's like saying all product review sites are bad. Knowing which companies don't value your life at all is a very useful piece of information when looking for future jobs.
> Knowing which companies don't value your life at all is a very useful piece of information when looking for future jobs.
How do you know this from reading anonymous messages? It might just as well be the competition or a 4chan troll telling you that Apple makes their employees cough each other in the face to improve morale.
Yeah, this looks terrible. I’m sure the creators pre populated all these initial posts. Anonymous, unverified ‘reports’? Analytics cookies with no option to decline? Seems like a great place for shit posting. Thanks but no thanks.
You should tweet at companies with a link to the site if they reach a certain number of upvotes. A more positive version of this site would be interesting too. A lot of companies are doing the right thing
29 comments
[ 2.2 ms ] story [ 65.7 ms ] threadYou're inspired by DHH but as history teach us, sites like this are mostly abused with fakes, and that's my only problem regarding your website. Why? Anon comments. If DHH will be accused of disinformation he will not shrug this off very easily...
They can totally work from home and everyone kept passing the buck when pressed about this.
The other day the staff got pissed enough they got a answer.. Basically the IT staff is not all that great and the VPN doesn't work so they are having people come into the office while they know they should be working from home.
For example: https://twitter.com/dhh/status/1240769043776163840?s=20
DHH has huge respect in industry, they will not piss him off, but some site? Nah. ;)
- Ripe for abuse: There is always some angry customer or (ex-)employee seeking revenge. Especially anonymous forums are problematic. Most of the information may be wrong or intentionally false, or highly perspectival, missing the bigger picture, etc.
- Blaming without discussion promotes vigilantism, sending the wrong signal to society. There should be a discussion of both sides of the story and a way for the other side to justify their actions.
- Ulterior motives of such sites are hard to figure out. They could be run for political goals, by adversaries, competition, etc. How do you know? Is it controlled by an authority?
- High potential for laws suits and subpoenas. The line between legitimate complaints and libel is thin.
- If the action to be blamed is illegal, then authorities should handle it. If it's not illegal, then maybe what looks like a legitimate complaint for the maker of the site is just a matter of perspective (or, to put it worse, ideology).
- The sites are adversarial by design, which is principally the wrong perspective. All they do is alienate one group from another, when in fact often both groups need to cooperate to solve the issue.
How do you know this from reading anonymous messages? It might just as well be the competition or a 4chan troll telling you that Apple makes their employees cough each other in the face to improve morale.
I really, really don't :)
> March 20, 2020 – Forced employees to donate kidneys to certain executives.
I guess unfiltered user data shouldn't be trusted, or have I missed something?