"Donglegate" who was right, wrong, and is it a big deal?

[DisgruntledVirus]

For those of you who haven't read up about it here is a link to the story: http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/...got-two-people-fired-and-led-to-ddos-attacks/. The short version is 2 guys were at an application developer conference, made sexual innuendo jokes about "forking repositories" and "big dongles." A woman in the row ahead of them took offense to it, took their picture, tweeted it out tagging the conference in it to talk to them. The one male, who I assume made the joke, was fired for essentially making inappropriate jokes. Then shortly after the woman was fired for publicly shaming them. The link give many more details, but that's the general premise of the story.

Reading this story I'm torn. On the one hand, having been to tech conferences before, it still can have the "men's club" feel to it. I don't believe that is right, however even today IT is still a very male dominated industry. Now on the other I don't believe that anybody should feel alienated because of their gender or sexual orientation (or race, ethnicity, background, etc but I digress here). So I'm conflicted. I know from personal experience that I've been at a conference with male coworkers/friends/whatever and we have made comments like this to one another that I'm sure she would have viewed as inappropriate based off her reaction to this one. I joke around with my coworkers. Yes there is a line that shouldn't be crossed, but if we are sitting at a conference and make a throwaway joke about hard drives to one another that somebody over hears I don't believe that is a serious "offense." Sure it might merit being talked to, but is it really a big deal? I don't believe these developers were intending to offend, nor were they directing the comments to her in my opinion and because of this if she was offended she should have moved seats or said something to them asking them to stop.

From here it only escalated, and I think the only person/group in this who handled things correctly were the event officials who talked to people in private and obtained apologies from the guys. The woman and the companies both were in the wrong. I think she was even hypocritical. She stated that she did this because of the little girl she saw and that jokes like that would prevent this little girl from becoming a programmer potentially. So her argument is that it's unprofessional and only fosters a male only club. So how is tweeting about it professional? It's not. The professional way to handle it would be to talk to them as a fellow human. Perhaps talk to an official. However tweeting about it certainly is not professional. It might get results, but tweets have this nasty habit of having unintended consequences. Say like getting her fired. So shame on her.

Now for the company that fired them both. From a corporate perspective I see why they let them both go, especially after getting DDoS'ed. But unless the guy had a history of inappropriate comments, I don't believe he should have been fired for a first time offense. Have him issue a public apology to her? Perhaps. Talk to him about it? Certainly. But to fire him is a bit drastic with only knowing about this situation and no other data to go off.

This brings me to the biggest surprise, the woman who tweeted got fired as well. And here is where I can side with the company a bit, even if firing is a bit drastic. She handled an unprofessional comment with an unprofessional response. And in my world view I think that the first accidental unprofessional event (the initial comment) is forgivable. However she intentionally acted unprofessionally, even if she didn't realize it was unprofessional at the time. That might be a bit confusing so let me elaborate a bit. She stated that her intention was to publicly shame them while getting in touch with the event staff, which she succeeded at doing. So she intended to respond in a manner that was akin taking a machine gun to a knife fight, but also failed to realize that tweeting about situations is generally not the way to go about handling things like this in a professional setting. Now does she deserve to get fired for that? I lean towards yes, but still have reservations. She seems to have responded in a way that's similar to the guy making the initial comment. She didn't think about the situation, the audience, and the consequences of tweeting it. So that's where my reservations come in about firing her. However, the company side of things is they were getting DDoS'ed because of her and I can see why they would want to distance themselves from her (and the situation) as quickly as possible.

It's an interesting story of "unintended consequences" and being aware of your surroundings and thinking about things before you do them. I know that I'll be more mindful in the future about jokes in conferences in light of this event. And you know, maybe that's a good thing.

 

[Lithium381]

I think people need to lighten up. It wasnt directed at her nor was it 8ntended to be offensiveq

 

[skyking]

She did indeed screw up by tweeting it. You can't take that back.
If she had any integrity she should have said something right then and there. That kind of public shaming is spot-on, in my world.

 

[Craig234]

Seems like excessive reaction by the company for each. Let's fire the company.

Too bad they didn't have a union.

 

[Murloc]

Everybody is taking this too serious with the firings and stuff, but she started the storm.
Seriously, if you don't like hearing dirty jokes, tell it to their face instead of using these bad karma tactics that ruin careers and put people on the spot, especially for something so trivial.

It's funny how anonymous stood up for him and got her fired though.

 

[Theb]

Tweeting a picture of someone who does something you don't like is passive aggressive high school level problem solving. She should have just asked them to stop. They don't exactly look like they're spoiling for a war of words.

I saw a photo on main stage of a little girl who had been in the Young Coders workshop.

I realized I had to do something or she would never have the chance to learn and love programming because the ass clowns behind me would make it impossible for her to do so.

I calculated my next steps. I knew there wasn’t a lot of time and the closing session would be wrapping up.

Good grief.

If she was fired because of the DDoS attacks then that's unfortunate, but if she was fired because her behavior demonstrated she might not have the interpersonal skills they're looking for in a Developer Evangelist, then I can understand that. The latter is kind of hard to believe though since they've kept her around this long https://twitter.com/adriarichards/statuses/6039856858

 

[skyking]

I knew there wasn’t a lot of time

To stick my foot in it.

 

[waggy]

Tweeting a picture of someone who does something you don't like is passive aggressive high school level problem solving. She should have just asked them to stop. They don't exactly look like they're spoiling for a war of words.



Good grief.

If she was fired because of the DDoS attacks then that's unfortunate, but if she was fired because her behavior demonstrated she might not have the interpersonal skills they're looking for in a Developer Evangelist, then I can understand that. The latter is kind of hard to believe though since they've kept her around this long https://twitter.com/adriarichards/statuses/6039856858

read some of her other tweets. i have no sympathy on what is happened to her.

she shouldn't have tweeted the pic without permisssion. then after it was done she was proud she got them fired.

 

[Lithium381]

for some reason, i have an inkling that she's a liberal. if someone doesn't have the exact same mindset as you do, has a different opinion on something, or says something you don't like, try and destroy them....wait, i mean be tolerant...:whiste:

 

[Craig234]

for some reason, i have an inkling that she's a liberal. if someone doesn't have the exact same mindset as you do, has a different opinion on something, or says something you don't like, try and destroy them....wait, i mean be tolerant...:whiste:

Thanks for the uninformed attack on liberals. Big contribution. You know, every time a liberal objects to, say, the n-word, they're just intolerant of others' opinion.

 

[Bowfinger]

IMO:

The guys were unprofessional for making suggestive jokes in a work-related setting. Such humor, though nearly ubiquitous, is considered unacceptable unless you are 100% certain that everybody in earshot finds it unoffensive. That said, this seems like a minor transgression, only slightly over the line, and not a grounds for dismissal unless there was a previous pattern of such behavior.

She was perfectly within her legal rights to object to the off-color humor. If she is truly so thin-skinned and humorless, however, she's going to have a lot of trouble getting along with others wherever she goes. Her hyperbole about driving away young women is self-serving nonsense, justifying her own overreaction. While women certainly do not have to tolerate sexual harassment, occasional off-color humor is everywhere, a part of normal human interaction for most people. It rises to the level of "hostile work environment" only if it continues after making it clear it is unwelcome.

Her reaction to the jokes was highly unprofessional. A mature professional should have either moved, or simply turned to the guys and said, "Gentlemen, I find your suggestive comments offensive. Stop." As long as they then complied, that should have been the end of it. At worst, if she was too timid to say something directly, she should have notified conference organizers and asked them to address it. Calling the guys out in such a public manner, without making any effort to stop them first, was completely unprofessional and immature.

In spite of this, I think her employer likely screwed themselves by firing her. Although I understand their (purported) reasoning and agree with it, I doubt it will play out well if she decided to take them to court. She will be able to make a plausible case that she was punished for exercising her legal right to object to and report sexual harassment. I could easily see her winning a big damages award and getting her job back, if she's dumb enough to accept it.

All in all, this was a perfect example of how NOT to handle offensive conduct. It seems to me that pretty much everyone except the conference organizers acted improperly.

 

[ivwshane]

What this a work environment or was this a convention where anyone with a ticket can come? Were the developers and the women at this event on company time? Were any of the people in attendance representing their respective employers?

Assuming it was a work related and paid for event both parties acted inappropriately, the women should have reported the incident to her supervisor and the guys, should have acted more professional. The companies might have overreacted but some sort of discipline was warranted for both parties, one for behavior and the other for posting a work related tweet as a representative of her company.

Now if it wasn't on work time and they didn't attend the event as representatives of their companies then everyone overreacted.

 

[Craig234]

In spite of this, I think her employer likely screwed themselves by firing her. Although I understand their (purported) reasoning and agree with it, I doubt it will play out well if she decided to take them to court.

The employer is very likely just fine legally. At-will employment, hence my union comment.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

The employer is very likely just fine legally. At-will employment, hence my union comment.

Unfortunately true, however there may be one legal basis for a suit if they can demonstrate that similar actions had been overlooked. It's worked before but it's not easy to prove.

 

[Charles Kozierok]

Thanks for the uninformed attack on liberals. Big contribution. You know, every time a liberal objects to, say, the n-word, they're just intolerant of others' opinion.

It's a judgment made without any evidence that I've seen, but not a ridiculous one in my experience. Liberals do tend to be far more sensitive about these matters than conservatives are.

I think that people should behave in a professional manner when attending work-related public events. But as others have said, this strikes me as a rather minor incident for such a big deal to have been made of it.

I believe it's also worth distinguishing between deliberate and incidental sexist comments. If they had directed those remarks directly at the woman who complained, I'd probably side with her -- that would be harrassment.

But she essentially eavesdropped on these guys.

The appropriate thing IMO, if it bothered her, would have been to turn around and chastise them for it face to face. Instead, she decided to use them in a self-righteous public shaming, and IMO, she deserves the blowback she received.

All that said, it appears they may have a hard time making her firing stand up in court, should she choose to go that route.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

I think she has a reasonable chance of being sued. See defamation per se.

I have a situation where a coworker is making life a living hell, calling others in my company and saying demonstrably false and damaging things, abusing the staff, not doing her work and blaming others, all things that are against written policy, have been proved and have been going on for 2 years now. She's immune from any consequences. She's black, female, and a naturalized citizen. She can do whatever she pleases.

 

[Murloc]

Saying that she's probably liberal is not a wrong assumption but it has nothing to do with the thread. It seems like americans take the worst of each side and make use of it to demonize the other.
This would be like an European saying that all the parties from the center to the left have the opinion of a swedish multi-kulti femnazi and that all the parties from the center to the right are neonazis. It's just ridicolous.

Anyway I gathered enough information to say that she's completely out of the line, especially for the "she's never gonna become a programmer because of these ass clowns" part. That's just a statement made in bad faith to appear righteous, while in reality she doesn't even believe that because it's clear there's no correlation.

 

[fskimospy]

I think she has a reasonable chance of being sued. See defamation per se.

I have a situation where a coworker is making life a living hell, calling others in my company and saying demonstrably false and damaging things, abusing the staff, not doing her work and blaming others, all things that are against written policy, have been proved and have been going on for 2 years now. She's immune from any consequences. She's black, female, and a naturalized citizen. She can do whatever she pleases.

How would she be sued for defamation? The requirements of defamation are first and foremost that it isn't true, and I don't think that anyone is arguing that. She behaved really inappropriately, taking a private conversation to a level that was utterly undeserved. Defamation though? Hardly.

 

[Charles Kozierok]

Saying that she's probably liberal is not a wrong assumption but it has nothing to do with the thread. It seems like americans take the worst of each side and make use of it to demonize the other.

You're right, and I agree that it was not a productive contribution, and certainly nobody has presented any actual evidence of her political views. I even tried to search for them and couldn't find anything.

You're also right that many Americans like to demonize each other.

 

[Bowfinger]

The employer is very likely just fine legally. At-will employment, hence my union comment.

No, at-will employment doesn't actually give employers an unbounded right to fire employees for any and every reason. They are still constrained by employment and discrimination laws. For example, at will employees cannot be fired due to race or religion. They also cannot be fired in retaliation for reporting violations like sexual harassment. She can make a credible case that's what happened here, even though the whole story is a bit more complex.

 

[Codewiz]

Was his inappropriate? Yes.

Was her reaction inappropriate? Yes

However, her response was basically an attempt to get the entire blogosphere to do the dirty work of shaming the guys. Instead of turning around and resolving the issue, she decided to let other people do her work.

Maybe as a man I am blinded by my gender but I feel sorry for the guy that got fired because he didn't intend to offend her. He did so he should have been told so that he could apologize immediately. On the other hand, I don't have a lot of sympathy for her because she created an online frenzy over an inappropriate comment. She brought all the negative attention to the issue when a simple conversation would have resolved it.

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

This woman apparently has a history of being a ****.
http://amandablumwords.wordpress.com/2013/03/21/3/

Also

The resemblance is uncanny.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

How would she be sued for defamation? The requirements of defamation are first and foremost that it isn't true, and I don't think that anyone is arguing that. She behaved really inappropriately, taking a private conversation to a level that was utterly undeserved. Defamation though? Hardly.

You may be correct. I haven't had a chance to read the entire piece so it depends on how things were handled. If the men confessed they are dead. If not, then the burden of proof falls on her, because defamation per se laws.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_defamation_law#Defamation_per_se

 

[Craig234]

No, at-will employment doesn't actually give employers an unbounded right to fire employees for any and every reason. They are still constrained by employment and discrimination laws. For example, at will employees cannot be fired due to race or religion. They also cannot be fired in retaliation for reporting violations like sexual harassment. She can make a credible case that's what happened here, even though the whole story is a bit more complex.

I didn't say it gives a right for any and every reason.

I said they're probably in the clear for THIS reason. Don't put words in my mouth.

 

[Charles Kozierok]

I didn't say it gives a right for any and every reason.

I said they're probably in the clear for THIS reason. Don't put words in my mouth.

He didn't, at least as far as I can see. He said he thought she would win in court, you replied commenting on "at-will employment", and he responded saying why he felt that was not relevant here.