undefined | Better HN

0 pointstreis5y ago0 comments

>And you are arguing in bad faith; there are several parts of the article that detail exactly what you are looing for.

Everything you list is an accusation. What I am looking for is:

(1) Person X said this racist thing happened.

(2) The event in (1) is (a) true, and (b) backed up by a corroborating witness, this email, some document, etc

>You also have to look at the facts; Susan is an excellent writer, and based on her book, she already had some measure of experience speaking truth to power.

If the NY Times doesn't have reporters that can do that then they should fire the ones they have and find some that can.

0 comments

ygjb5y ago

Meh. You are moving goal posts, and you are making baseless claims against an experienced reporter who is well connected in the Bay Area for a major newspaper.

You are offhandedly discounting the reported experience of more than 20 people, many of whom have come forward with evidence.

treisOP5y ago

>You are moving goal posts, and you are making baseless claims against an experienced reporter who is well connected in the Bay Area for a major newspap

You did that! You said Susan Fowler was effective because she was able to speak truth to power. Implying that this article is ineffective because the writer doesn't know how to speak truth to power.

>You are offhandedly discounting the reported experience of more than 20 people, many of whom have come forward with evidence.

No I didn't. I said I tend to believe them.

honkdaddy5y ago

Personally, I think what he's asking for is entirely reasonable, and I was also disappointed to see a lack of hard evidence in the hit-piece.

joshuamorton5y ago

So you're looking for a smoking gun level of proof? The unfortunate thing is that life usually isn't that easy. When smart people do bad things they generally don't leave a paper trail.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse