It took me a minute to find the background on the topic linked with the tweet. Basically, the tweet and the thread contained additional information relevant. Basically, taking a single tweet along without context is dishonest.
-
-
It's akin to me summarizing
@unclebobmartin's open letter as him talking about how he has "enjoyed serving [the software development community] for the last 50 years." He says this in the letter. It's not a fair representation of the story.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
In summary, there is a lot of information being left out of the letter, and it's done so that presupposes which side is right and which side is wrong, rather than truly seeking an answer. Basically:
@unclebobmartin isn't looking for an answer, he's made up his mind.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
/You still have yet to show the new evidence. You talked about it a lot, but you did not show it./
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Technically I showed as much evidence as the letter does. But you already agree with me. Thanks for your support.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @jasonlotito @kenogulabz and
Jason Lotito Retweeted Kevin Stewart
However, more background information can be found here: https://twitter.com/kstewart/status/1191492562764218369 … This is linked to by the tweets described in the original letter. As you can see, there is more than just a picture and a phone call. Suggesting otherwise is dishonest. Facts. 'nuff said.
Jason Lotito added,
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
I'm boggled as to what you think this shows. I still see no new evidence, as every reply is either saying, 'Ugh, that guy' or pointing back to the same incident in the accusation tweets.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Jason Lotito Retweeted Kevin Stewart
This is a lie. One of the posts in that thread: https://twitter.com/kstewart/status/1191494421566509056 … This doesn't just say "ugh, that guy". The thread also references an early incident, which the letter doesn't discuss.
Jason Lotito added,
3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
That's the incident in the original accusation, and it requires believing
@sarahmei 's ascribed reading of intent at face value to make a substantive piece of evidence; something I refuse to do, given she is a consistent bad actor with these kinds of ascribed-motive accusations.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @kenogulabz @ndborkedaunt and
"That's the incident in the original accusation" That's not mentioned in the letter, even the doubt of whether it's true. Prove me wrong with proof or GTFO. The letter leaves information out. You are literally proving me right with your own tweets. Worthless.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Fellshard Retweeted Kim Crayton [She/Her] 🏢 💻 🎙#causeascene
https://twitter.com/KimCrayton1/status/1191697390799130624 … Right here, in the original thread that the Linux Foundation responded to with the public denouncement.
Fellshard added,
-
-
Replying to @kenogulabz @ndborkedaunt and
I've already covered why singling out a single tweet alone is dishonest. Keep up. You still haven't offered anything to prove otherwise. Indeed, the only thing you've offered is proof that I am right. Thanks.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes - 4 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
