I think Paul's follow-up tweets Saikat would have been more illuminating to discuss in the post. Is accountability to public opinion the right way to address these matters? Do the "cancel" punishments fit the crime? How much does intent versus interpretation matter?
I didn't see that follow up conversation with Saikat. Reading it now, Graham's argument is pretty misleading. There are things - shooting a coworker, say - that we all agree should bar you from employment everywhere. That notion in and of itself isn't draconian. Graham isn't arguing against that idea; he's just saying he thinks what Antonio did isn't bad enough to warrant it. And for the record, I think it is bad enough to bar him from positions managing women. If you want to play a villain - and write a whole book about it for your own self-aggrandizement - you gotta take the good with the bad.
But to the broader point, is public opinion the right court for these things to be decided? It's certainly not perfect. But the other option is the court in which Graham, or people like him, are the judge. And they're not impartial judges either. I suspect, for instance, the women who might report to Antonio would judge his comments very differently than Graham, and wouldn't wave them off as harmless comments just said for shock value. And ultimately, if I'm making a choice between who should hold the powerful accountable, their powerful friends or everybody else, it's not a hard choice.
I think it's important to note that Paul is also operating in the realm of public opinion. But I'll take your point to hypothesize if he was with Apple had authority to retain Antonio.
Are the only options friends or public trial? If there were to be an incident at Mode - should it be detailed online for public opinion to decide the just course of action? I don't think this is what you mean, but it's an implication. Were the David Shore, Alexi McCammond, Donald G. McNeil firings just? I would challenge you to think of the bound and limits public opinion. This deserve real discussion.
I think Paul's follow-up tweets Saikat would have been more illuminating to discuss in the post. Is accountability to public opinion the right way to address these matters? Do the "cancel" punishments fit the crime? How much does intent versus interpretation matter?
I didn't see that follow up conversation with Saikat. Reading it now, Graham's argument is pretty misleading. There are things - shooting a coworker, say - that we all agree should bar you from employment everywhere. That notion in and of itself isn't draconian. Graham isn't arguing against that idea; he's just saying he thinks what Antonio did isn't bad enough to warrant it. And for the record, I think it is bad enough to bar him from positions managing women. If you want to play a villain - and write a whole book about it for your own self-aggrandizement - you gotta take the good with the bad.
But to the broader point, is public opinion the right court for these things to be decided? It's certainly not perfect. But the other option is the court in which Graham, or people like him, are the judge. And they're not impartial judges either. I suspect, for instance, the women who might report to Antonio would judge his comments very differently than Graham, and wouldn't wave them off as harmless comments just said for shock value. And ultimately, if I'm making a choice between who should hold the powerful accountable, their powerful friends or everybody else, it's not a hard choice.
I think it's important to note that Paul is also operating in the realm of public opinion. But I'll take your point to hypothesize if he was with Apple had authority to retain Antonio.
Are the only options friends or public trial? If there were to be an incident at Mode - should it be detailed online for public opinion to decide the just course of action? I don't think this is what you mean, but it's an implication. Were the David Shore, Alexi McCammond, Donald G. McNeil firings just? I would challenge you to think of the bound and limits public opinion. This deserve real discussion.
A good bellwether case is the David Shore firing.