548
549

We apologize (self.announcements)

ekjp[A] が 投稿x13

並べ替え:
ベスト
トップ新着論争中古い順Q&A
あなたは単独のコメントのスレッドを見ています。

残りのコメントをみる →

[–]MikeIsaac 177ポイント178ポイント  (12子コメント)

Hi there,

Yes, I can confirm this. I asked Ellen about how it feels to be a target of brutal criticism and, often, outright misogyny and racism. Her response was to that in particular, and was not disparaging of moderators at large.

Also, as I said to Ms. Pao, if you read that quote in context, that is what is conveyed.

From the article:

"Reddit users have also questioned Ms. Pao’s ability to lead the company while dealing with major issues in her personal life. For nearly two years, Ms. Pao was embroiled in a well-publicized discrimination lawsuit against Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers, the venture capital firm. Ms. Pao lost that case in March.

But Ms. Pao says that the most virulent detractors on the site are a vocal minority, and that most of Reddit users were not interested in what unfolded over the past 48 hours."

[–]Ysmildr 35ポイント36ポイント  (6子コメント)

I think what muddies the distinction is that its immediately followed by "and that most of Reddit users..."

If those had been two separate comments, it would make the distinction of "most virulent detractors" a bit more noticeable. As it stands, it looks like there's either the virulent detractors, or the users who are not interested. When in reality, there's a large margin not calling her Hitler, yet still signing the petition for her removal. It makes it look like to her, that margin doesn't exist. Not trying to be mean or offensive by pointing this out, just trying to explain why most people are taking this part of the article the wrong way.

[–]MikeIsaac 21ポイント22ポイント  (4子コメント)

I think what you're saying is fair.

What's unfortunate and what seemed to give that particular line a life of its own is that it was ripped from the article without the context of the previous paragraph, which is why many folks seemed to misconstrue its meaning.

But I appreciate the feedback.

[–]kirbs2001 3ポイント4ポイント  (0子コメント)

I dont want to pile on (i guess i'm going to anyway), but what struck me about the last line was "over the past 48 hours". To me, and i guess a lot of folks, that seemed to refer to the subreddit shutdown, rather than the attacks on Ms. Pao that i assume have unfortunately been happening for a while.

I can see the context now, but I would rather not need to have it explained to me.

[–]st_gulik 4ポイント5ポイント  (0子コメント)

I took it that way and I read the entire article before seeing it posted on reddit. It'd be nice if /u/ekjp would clarify her view.

[–]jtriangle 1ポイント2ポイント  (1子コメント)

But I appreciate the feedback.

And we appreciate you! =]

[–]lolthr0w 8ポイント9ポイント  (0子コメント)

and that most of Reddit users were not interested in what unfolded over the past 48 hours."

I think this part was what caused the confusion.

[–]wrigsam 28ポイント29ポイント  (1子コメント)

The Internet can be cool sometimes. Ask a CEO about a newspaper article, then ask the reporter to confirm what she said. All in a matter of 30 minutes.

[–]amg 3ポイント4ポイント  (0子コメント)

I think that is why we all come here. Such a massive network of so many people. Interesting things happen here everyday.

Despite how angry and wrong we can be at one time, we can also be so beautiful.

Ugh. We're like a reflection of humanity. Congratulations Us.

[–]reddit_can_suck_my_ 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

OH THE MISOGYNY faints

[–]dreamsaremaps 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

Maybe if any of you friendless basement- dwelling mouth-breathers read the god damn article, you would have carried your pitchforks in the right fuckin' direction. Not that I read the article or anything...