Sarah Nyberg

SOCRATES: I am wiser than this man; he fancies he knows something, although he knows nothing— DARRYL, SOCRATES' FRIEND: fuck him up socrates

you're welcome to try, "i was just in the car that robbed a bank but i didn't rob it!" in front of a judge but uh, good luck

guilt by association, as in the logical fallacy, refers to properties you *do not* control, not voluntary association

who you endorse is a reflection of your character. if you endorse bigots, it reflects on you. rightfully so!

being critical of someone for endorsing bigots isn't "guilt by association."https://twitter.com/iainspad/status/719680648571711489 …

if you are uncomfortable with the idea of conferences having pro-slavery advocates speak you literally risk having your career destroyed

i don't really know what else to say other than that @alisonrapp has my unequivocal support and she should have yours as well.

anyone trying to understand the latter through the lens of the former is going to not fully grok what it is to experience this shit.

individual, isolated instances of harassment are still horrible, yes. but they pale in comparison to coordinated campaigns of abuse.

it's all of them, used in coordination, to justify & maximize the abuse in a way that does the most damage possible to you.

it's not just people losing jobs, not just death threats, not just invasions of privacy, not just your friends & family being harassed.

journalism about online harassment almost never conveys how horrifying it is to be targeted because they events as isolated incidents

("harmful" here refers to harmful to the person in question, ie their reputation/well-being, not harmful as in they've done something wrong)

public disclosure of private, harmful facts is illegal in many jurisdictions in the US and with good reason. the problem is prosecuting it.

not only is "well, it isn't illegal" evading the discussion about how unethical this is, IT ISN'T EVEN TRUE.