Just like many people predicted in the submission for asking the questions, it looks like the good, hard-hitting questions were totally ignored.
What's the point of having these/. interviews, regardless of who they're with, if all we get are answers to lame, uninteresting questions?
This isn't the only case where this has happened, of course. The same thing happened with the Linus Torvalds interview a few weeks ago. The best questions remained ignored, or if answered indirectly, the answers were pretty half-
Brianna Wu doesn't fail to disappoint yet again. Always ducking the hard questions. Too bad the truth is already out there, and failing to address it yet again only adds more confirmation. Cowardly to the end.
We don't actually know that she got sent the hard questions.
Does the interviewee go through the original post and look at everything that got a score of 5? That's a fairly low bar to hit, and probably a bit unreasonable.
I think it more likely that one of the editorial types gathered up the questions, using the best spelled of various repeats among questions (ok, that's a stretch), and decided what to send. I don't expect that they'd send anything that was outright abusive, no matter what score the questio
Do you really expect her to answer your troll questions where you won't even acknowledge her gender? I wouldn't answer questions about my mental health, or about allegations that were already debunked by other commentators etc. Engaging would only feed into the harassment, it's best to just try to answer people with a genuine interest in what you are doing and forward copies of the worst of it to the FBI.
By the way, have you ever heard of retweeting? It's where you copy/paste a tweet that someone else sent
So the good questions were ignored. (Score:5, Insightful)
Just like many people predicted in the submission for asking the questions, it looks like the good, hard-hitting questions were totally ignored.
What's the point of having these /. interviews, regardless of who they're with, if all we get are answers to lame, uninteresting questions?
This isn't the only case where this has happened, of course. The same thing happened with the Linus Torvalds interview a few weeks ago. The best questions remained ignored, or if answered indirectly, the answers were pretty half-
Re: So the good questions were ignored. (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:5, Insightful)
We don't actually know that she got sent the hard questions.
Does the interviewee go through the original post and look at everything that got a score of 5? That's a fairly low bar to hit, and probably a bit unreasonable.
I think it more likely that one of the editorial types gathered up the questions, using the best spelled of various repeats among questions (ok, that's a stretch), and decided what to send. I don't expect that they'd send anything that was outright abusive, no matter what score the questio
Re: So the good questions were ignored. (Score:4, Informative)
We don't actually know that she got sent the hard questions.
He claims to have read through all the questions on Twitter [archive.is].
And it looks like someone forgot which account they were logged into [twitter.com] when faking harassment again! Oops!
Re: (Score:2)
We don't actually know that she got sent the hard questions.
He claims to have read through all the questions on Twitter [archive.is].
And it looks like someone forgot which account they were logged into [twitter.com] when faking harassment again! Oops!
Now that should be modded informative.
Re: (Score:2)
I dunno. Not taking sides, but your sarcasm detector might be broken?
Re: (Score:2)
Replied to wrong post. Should be attached to the parent.
Re: (Score:3)
And it looks like someone forgot which account they were logged into [twitter.com] when faking harassment again! Oops!
Sarcasm in text. It's hard. And some people just don't want to understand, which makes it harder.
Re: (Score:3)
Do you really expect her to answer your troll questions where you won't even acknowledge her gender? I wouldn't answer questions about my mental health, or about allegations that were already debunked by other commentators etc. Engaging would only feed into the harassment, it's best to just try to answer people with a genuine interest in what you are doing and forward copies of the worst of it to the FBI.
By the way, have you ever heard of retweeting? It's where you copy/paste a tweet that someone else sent