SebastianVerified account

Had some replies to this so want to clarify. Does not matter your intentions, or if you feel you are in a position to speak out. It matters about how you are perceived.

Maybe you've encountered people more generous than I have. But the trend I've seen, as evidenced by the engagement in these tweets, is that, yes, people do assume you support major actions of your employer, and the onus is on you to speak out and prove otherwise.

If you don't want to, or can't, then you'll have to deal with and accept the criticism and assumptions people will make.

If I understand you correctly, you are saying that those who are most vulnerable and precarious should accept the assumptions made about them based on the actions of their employers. I urge you to reflect on this and reconsider.

Who are you describing as "vulnerable and precarious"? And do you not think that people make those assumptions?

I mean people who are not able to voice criticism of their employer publicly for fear of losing their means of subsistence. I certainly agree with you that people make those assumptions. But those assumptions are wrong and should be challenged, not accepted.

I say accept as in, just be aware of them. Acceptance doesn't mean you have to think that it's fair. My criticism is against Facebook employees who seem surprised when others generalize and assume bad intent. What does challenging actually look like?

Don’t know about surprised, but I would definitely tell people who assume bad intent from employees to focus on criticising those who have the power to make the ruinous decisions that they oppose, not those who are dependent on that power.