Author Topic: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74  (Read 1376782 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Pen^2

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1107
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #4440 on: September 09, 2013, 02:24:00 PM »
TechCrunch tech conference kicks off with two guys presenting an app called "Titstare."  Where you can upload pictures of breasts and rate other people's uploads.  And somehow the organizers of this conference had no idea anyone would find this (made-up, I hope) app presentation offensive.  A second presenter also simulated masturbation during his talk.

The official apology was "The two presentations were taken out of context.  Also, the presentations were intended as satire.  We apologize if anyone was offended."

(They did eventually release a much better apology, but seriously?  Didn't they think the presentations might be worth, oh, at least a casual glance before giving them the green light?)

*headdesk**headdesk**headdesk* Why must people like this be Australian?! *headdesk**headdesk**headdesk*

*mustnotanswerwithpoliticalrant**mustnotanswerwithpoliticalrant*

Ahem

I have no idea...

Iris, congratulations on your discretion. I'm not sure I'd be able to do the same.

And seriously? Who thought that might possibly be a good idea? Satire can be easily turned offensive if the audience doesn't know it's satire. The first apology seems like it's telling people to just get over it because they obviously can't take a joke. Ugh.

Wow. And yes, not bothering to glance over the presentations in advance is an easy mistake to make, and potentially forgivable. The non-apology they made speaks much worse of them. "Oh, it was only satire, so that makes it okay! Sexism and racism and every other ism are okay once they're done for fun instead of seriously! But, you know, if you were offended, then we're sorry, we guess. We aren't sorry if we were offensive or inappropriate, because we weren't. We're sorry because you took the action of being offended. There's a difference, which is that we did nothing wrong here."

KB

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 193
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #4441 on: September 09, 2013, 09:03:16 PM »
The only good part is that almost everyone who went to that convention vowed not to work with the app's creators, so if they ever want work in the future in that field, they have shot themselves in both feet.

unnalee

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 114
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #4442 on: September 10, 2013, 10:36:29 AM »
I'm still about 30 pages from the end of the thread, but I encountered a man at work yesterday who it seems has committed PD with pretty much anyone he's encountered who might have been in the position to employ him.  A Google search revealed that he has been fired from several journalist positions and proclaims himself an expert in all things dealing with "politics, history, geography, science, and math."  Seems he's tried to blackmail media outlets into giving him a job, or even to pay him to NOT print his pieces.

The university I work for is compiling information on the incident and his continued harassment of our employees, but here's the general letter I sent to my director, the university president, and our security staff after he came to my office yesterday.  I've been purposely vague in some areas.  I hope it makes sense.  Can't imagine why he's a "free-lance journalist and traveling archeologist" (his words!)

Dear University President,
 
I want you to be aware of something that took place at my office yesterday afternoon.  A man named Mike [not his real name] came to the archive and proceeded to interrupt my work with a visiting researcher (who became so fed up with Mike's non-stop commentary that he wrote me a note saying he'd come back tomorrow and left), insult me for not being one of the "decision makers", completely monopolized my time, criticized everything from event brochures we have for people to take, to a supposed typo in the university newspaper, and then laid out a threat to embarrass the University in any forum he can find, if you and John [my immediate supervisor] don't reach out to him, meet with him, and give him a forum to address his pet issue.
 
He told me his intention was to visit your office, but he apparently decided to harangue me for over an hour instead.  His main beef with the university at this point seems to center on an article he wrote about what he called an outright lie by the government of Blueland. [He wanted Blueland to admit that they had a historical fact wrong on one of their websites]  The Blueland government did not address the issue to his satisfaction, and the impression I got was that he had brought the issue to Ann's attention recently [a administrator at our university].  He was incensed by her "unprofessionalism" and lack of concern over taking a stand on the issue.  He seems to think that the university should somehow give him a platform on which to force Blueland to correct this error.  I have no idea why he thinks anyone on campus would have that kind of influence.  But the threat was that if the university won't collaborate with him, he will see the university as an "adversary" (his exact word) and do his best to embarrass it in any forum he can.  He also strait forwardly demanded that you disavow Ann's behavior, though he never elaborated on what transpired between them.

In looking at some of his other online articles, he seems to think that his pursuit of this issue is helpful, but his personality was so aggressive, abrasive, and belittling of anyone who isn't falling all over themselves thanking him for his insight, that I have very seldom disliked someone so much after spending so little time around them.  I do not say such things lightly about people I barely know.  If he shows up in my office again, my first impulse is to call security.  I never directly felt physically threatened by him, but he did put me so on edge and was so emotionally draining that I was shaking by the time I got to my car.

He charged me with passing on his message and his contact information to both you and John.  I have no idea why he thinks I should be the intermediary in this.  I promised nothing except to pass on the contact information, but reading through some of the responses from others online it appears he will NOT give up gnawing this bone easily.
 
The man was a boor, who ignored every attempt I made to wrap up the one-sided conversation.  He sat talking at me until 5 p.m. [We close at 4:30, which he knew]  I shut down the lights in the stacks and display case, started locking up doors, and he still didn't pick up on any clues that he should leave.  Even when I point-blank said that it was past closing and I needed to go (I did not want to be left in the building alone with him), he kept talking about how many articles he's published, which galleries and museums he is banned from, etc.  He believes he is being targeted and harassed by the U.S. government, and compared himself to Julian Assange and Edward Snowden.
 
I did some poking around online when I got home and it seems this type of behavior is his M.O.  I'm not sure what his desired end result is in this.  I sincerely hope I never have to deal with him again.

artk2002

  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 12989
    • The Delian's Commonwealth
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #4443 on: September 10, 2013, 11:03:59 AM »
Unalee, what you have there is your garden-variety crackpot. I'm surprised you haven't run into one of these before. I think just about every librarian here (DavidH, Yarnspinner, others) has stories about someone with an obsession over some thing or another and demands support for their position. Real journalists have the same problems as well.
Twenty years from now you will be more disappointed by the things that you didn't do than by the ones you did do. So throw off the bow lines. Sail away from the safe harbor. Catch the trade winds in your sails. Explore. Dream. Discover. -Mark Twain

unnalee

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 114
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #4444 on: September 10, 2013, 11:27:11 AM »
Unalee, what you have there is your garden-variety crackpot. I'm surprised you haven't run into one of these before. I think just about every librarian here (DavidH, Yarnspinner, others) has stories about someone with an obsession over some thing or another and demands support for their position. Real journalists have the same problems as well.

Oh, I've met a few crackpots in the year and a half I've worked here.  But this guy took it to a whole new level I've never seen before.  I found informal journalism forums online that raked this guy up one side and down the other, and detail just which papers and media outlets have dealt with him or been the focus of his obsessive fact-checking. 

He seems to have a genuine concern for accuracy, but his delivery is so horrifically self-centered and abrasive, that the message is lost.

Pen^2

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1107
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #4445 on: September 10, 2013, 11:35:18 AM »
Unalee, I once had a very similar person try to get a job with the university I was briefly working at. He started out very much like your guy. After a few emails (all miles long), things started changing from boor to very-obviously-crazy. Completely unprompted and unrelated to anything that had been said or asked to him, he would write, for example, eighteen detailed paragraphs about why Uluru was a meteorite which had hit the earth aeons ago and it was subsequently proof that aliens are among us. It was rude and annoying at first, then funny as we realised he was bonkers, and finally it got quite frightening as we started fearing that we wouldn't be able to shake this very unhinged individual. He described himself as many things, including, "free-range anthropologist," "political journalism lateral thinker," and "Nobel laureate in both mathematics and astronomy" (for those who don't know, there are no such categories for the Nobel prize, and he was applying for a job in the mathematics department which was obviously well aware of this).

Reika

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 3012
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #4446 on: September 10, 2013, 12:15:53 PM »
I know that someone posted about something related to this article earlier in the thread, but it seems like that offensive app is still getting people to cause PD...

Business Insider Fires CTO Over Offensive Tweets

cwm

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2427
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #4447 on: September 10, 2013, 12:19:13 PM »
I know that someone posted about something related to this article earlier in the thread, but it seems like that offensive app is still getting people to cause PD...

Business Insider Fires CTO Over Offensive Tweets

And this is why not only is my Twitter and any other online platform not linked at all to my real name, but I also pass things through the grandma filter. If someone's grandma would probably be offended, it's best not to put it out there.

Reika

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 3012
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #4448 on: September 10, 2013, 12:28:22 PM »
I know that someone posted about something related to this article earlier in the thread, but it seems like that offensive app is still getting people to cause PD...

Business Insider Fires CTO Over Offensive Tweets

And this is why not only is my Twitter and any other online platform not linked at all to my real name, but I also pass things through the grandma filter. If someone's grandma would probably be offended, it's best not to put it out there.

An excellent idea. :)

Hillia

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 4067
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #4449 on: September 10, 2013, 12:41:43 PM »
BIL might have finally been hit enough times with the clue-by-four that he's gotten it.  He received a promotion into management, and posted a series of FB rants about how he had effectively taken a cut in pay because of all the extra work he now had to do, and how he wasn't getting any support from  his bosses, and how much his job sucked.  His bosses, peers, and employees are all friended on FB.  He also holds some extreme political views, which he enjoys sharing on FB, and doesn't always bother to verify his 'facts' ("if you've eaten at McDonald's, you've eaten horsemeat").

His job is a fairly visible one, and one which might lead members of the public to believe that his opinions are those of his employer.  He's finally quit posting inappropriate material on FB; instead he now has a blog where he overshares about his sex life or lack thereof.

            Created by MyFitnessPal.com - Free Weight Loss Tools

ladyknight1

  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 7770
  • Operating the logic hammer since 1987.
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #4450 on: September 10, 2013, 07:57:23 PM »
As most of you probably know, social media is becoming more of a tool for marketing and information than email and many industries are pushing social media.

I am now on the social media team for my little chunk of our organization. They meet every other month for an hour, the remainder of the time, everything is communicated through email. Because some locations have been lackadaisical in their duties, the social media portion of their jobs is being formally written into their job descriptions. I have never heard so many 40+ year old employees whine like kindergartners. That meeting was nearly unbearable.

Iris

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 3867
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #4451 on: September 11, 2013, 02:43:29 AM »
I know that someone posted about something related to this article earlier in the thread, but it seems like that offensive app is still getting people to cause PD...

Business Insider Fires CTO Over Offensive Tweets

And this is why not only is my Twitter and any other online platform not linked at all to my real name, but I also pass things through the grandma filter. If someone's grandma would probably be offended, it's best not to put it out there.

The thing that worries me about things like this are that somehow, somewhere, they've picked up the idea that *this is okay*. Sure, they could just be massively clueless but I'm afraid cynicalIris usually suspects that they have voiced this kind of comment aloud and never been reprimanded for it. It's only when they create a digital trace of it that the companies take action. Interesting assumption I know, but that's where my mind goes.
"Can't do anything with children, can you?" the woman said.

Poirot thought you could, but forebore to say so.

Mel the Redcap

  • Scheming Foreign Hussy!
  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 978
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #4452 on: September 11, 2013, 05:06:42 AM »
I know that someone posted about something related to this article earlier in the thread, but it seems like that offensive app is still getting people to cause PD...

Business Insider Fires CTO Over Offensive Tweets

And this is why not only is my Twitter and any other online platform not linked at all to my real name, but I also pass things through the grandma filter. If someone's grandma would probably be offended, it's best not to put it out there.

The thing that worries me about things like this are that somehow, somewhere, they've picked up the idea that *this is okay*. Sure, they could just be massively clueless but I'm afraid cynicalIris usually suspects that they have voiced this kind of comment aloud and never been reprimanded for it. It's only when they create a digital trace of it that the companies take action. Interesting assumption I know, but that's where my mind goes.

I'm sure that's true for some of them... but if it makes you feel any better, I've met/encountered quite a few people who go wayyyy further in text/email/chat than they ever would face-to-face or on the phone. It's like if it doesn't involve seeing or hearing the person they're communicating with, it's somehow not quite 'real' to them, and their social acceptability filters switch off.

They tend to be awfully surprised when they're called on it. ::)
"Set aphasia to stun!"

ladyknight1

  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 7770
  • Operating the logic hammer since 1987.
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #4453 on: September 11, 2013, 10:22:37 PM »
In this day and age, you have to be really bold to lie about a degree. She did get away with it for a short time.

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/09/wall-street-journal-elizabeth-obagy-fired-96637.html?hp=f2

For those who don't want to go to the story, this young woman was hired as an intern. "O’Bagy started at the institute as an unpaid intern and was pulled into their work on Syria when a researcher needed a fluent Arabic speaker, which transformed her internship into a much longer gig. Kagan hired O’Bagy as an analyst around August or September 2012, and said her understanding was that O’Bagy was working toward her Ph.D. at Georgetown." According to Georgetown University, O'Bagy earned a BA and a MA, but is not registered as a student.

She has been fired.


dietcokeofevil

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1970
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #4454 on: September 12, 2013, 12:12:21 AM »
I'm working on a large project at a customer site with several other company's.  Another company hired a contractor to work with them.  On his first day the contractor, Joe, showed up in clothes so tight and small that when he bent over, almost his entire behind was exposed.
I wasn't going to say anything at first, thought maybe in his rush to relocate for this job he didn't realize he had outgrown these clothes.  It didn't get better, and finally after a couple of weeks there was one day when Joe was standing in the hallway talking to me, his pants were hanging down so low (because they wouldn't fasten around his belly) that his bottom was hanging out.  If he had his shirt pulled down enough to cover his butt, then he belly was exposed.  I had to report it to my manager (and project lead) who then reported it to Joe's company.  It took another week, but finally Joe started to be covered.  This was about 5 months ago and things have been fine since.

Last weekend Joe was working overtime with someone from my company, Sam.  He started complaining to Sam about getting complaints on his clothing.  I'm not sure if that's what his management told him, or just how he interpreted it, but according to Joe the issue was that he didn't wear undershirts and that we all were just major snobs about it.  Sam finally got tired of Joe's complaining and said that the issue was not that he wasn't wearing undershirts, but that he was showing too much skin.   Joe's excuse was  that no one had complained about it at his previous job.  So apparently it's okay to have your butt hanging out of your clothes at work as long as no one complains!