It seems not to be in dispute that Timnit offered an ultimatum with a series of demands that needed to be met for her not to resign. It seems not to be in dispute that Google decided that it wasn't in the business' interest for this paper to be published (for whatever reason). The rest is either cloudy (why did Google choose to part ways with her) or moot (was her ultimatum technically a resignation or not).
Some folk clearly fall into the category of #BelieveBlackWomen, which seems to be a surprisingly non-curious attitude to take. (Does being black or female automatically make an account more credible? Don't both sides have plenty to gain by putting a positive spin on their version of events?)
A plausible alternate explanation of events is that Timnit had become a liability to Google. We have to speculate a little here, but we do know that she got into a very public spat with Facebook's Chief AI Scientist, leading to him quitting Twitter; that she sent a broad mail to ERG groups that undermined the leadership's messaging and goals around diversity; and that she admits she "hired feminist lawyers who threatened to sue Google". It's quite possible that her ultimatum was the final straw for Google leadership, both because capitulating would set a precedent for others to hold the company ransom, and because her employment had become a net negative.
But we don't know. Google is unlikely to share its side of events for reasons of liability. In general, company executives have more at stake from a bald-faced lie, but it's not possible to be sure. So it we're left with the choice of "believe her unequivocally" or "reserve judgement".
Those who fall into the latter category are far less likely to speak out. I'm a Googler, but it's ironic that it feels career-limiting to not vocally dissent from the petition, such that I'm using an anonymized account for the first time. But I suspect there is a silent but significant constituency at Google who are skeptical of her claims, as well as many others who would love nothing more than for less political activism in the workplace.
Does that mean it's career limiting if you don't publicly denounce the petition?
Or does that mean it's career limiting to dissent from the petition quietly or in writing?
