 have a right to be upset
about his choice of wording or angry at his opinions? Sure, absolutely! But
losing your career for this, over an opinion that is, arguably, not really
harmful or hateful and expressed in a relatively considerate tone, is
something else entirely.

~~~
matchu
Mm, thanks for calling out the false-negative thing! I think I misparsed that
the first time around and got confused between decreasing false negatives and
increasing false positives. That's embarrassing, sorry ^_^`

In any case, I think I made a mistake suggesting specific improvements to the
memo; lemme pop off the stack a bit:

It's not okay to publish a document to your coworkers that will predictably
make them feel unsafe. Full stop.

When you want to express an idea at work, you need to engage in empathy, and
try to express yourself in such a way that your coworkers will still feel safe
with you. If you can't figure out how to express an idea without hurting your
coworkers, then, yeah, you don't get to express it unless you figure something
out :/ That's an appropriate workplace policy, and I'm comfortable with the
general idea that freedom of expression is subject to some conditions. I know
not everybody agrees with that prioritization, though!

More importantly, I'm just tired of articles like this one dismissing the
social consequences lens outright. There's more than one valid issue being
raised in our community right now, and the importance of one doesn't
invalidate the others. Let's have both conversations: how to enable expression
of less common ideas, and how to ensure that we express them empathetically.
If we approach the problem thoughtfully, I think we can optimize for both :)

(BTW I edited this comment a lot during the first 30 minutes, and pretty
significantly changed its contents. Sorry if that ends up being an issue!)

~~~
slavak
I actually tend to mostly agree with you on this. I think the safest and most
rational policy is just to avoid discussing sensitive topics at work so as not
to risk creating a hostile atmosphere, and I don't consider this an
unreasonable restriction on freedom of expression. Talk politics and
immigration with your friends and family, not your teammates at the office.

My problem is
have a right to be upset 
 about his choice of wording or angry at his public opinion? surely, absolutely! But 
 losing your career for this, over an opinion that is, arguably, not in truth 
 harmful or hateful and express in a relatively considerate tone, is 
 something else entirely. 

 ~~~ 
 matchu 
 Mm, thanks for call out the fake - negative thing! I think I misparsed that 
 the first prison term around and got confused between decrease assumed negatives and 
 increasing false positives. That's embarrassing, regretful ^_^ '

 In any case, I think I made a error suggesting specific improvements to the 
 memo; lemme start off the stack a spot: 

 It's not okay to publish a document to your coworkers that will predictably 
 make them feel insecure. Full stop. 

 When you want to express an idea at work, you need to engage in empathy, and 
 try to express yourself in such a way that your coworkers will still feel safe 
 with you. If you can't figure out how to express an idea without ache your 
 coworkers, then, yeah, you don't get to express it unless you calculate something 
 out :/ That's an appropriate workplace policy, and I'm comfortable with the 
 general idea that freedom of expression is capable to some conditions. I acknowledge 
 not everybody agrees with that prioritization, though! 

 More importantly, I'm just banal of articles like this one dismissing the 
 social consequences lens outright. There's more than one valid issue being 
 raised in our community right now, and the importance of one doesn't 
 invalidate the others. Let's have both conversation: how to enable expression 
 of less coarse idea, and how to ensure that we express them empathetically. 
 If we approach the problem thoughtfully, I think we can optimize for both :) 

 (BTW I edited this remark a lot during the first 30 minutes, and pretty 
 importantly changed its contents. Sorry if that ends up being an issue !) 

 ~~~ 
 slavak 
 I actually tend to largely agree with you on this. I remember the safest and about 
 rational policy is just to invalidate discussing sensitive topic at work so as not 
 to gamble creating a hostile atmosphere, and I don't consider this an 
 excessive restriction on freedom of expression. Talk politics and 
 immigration with your friend and family, not your teammates at the office. 

 My trouble is
 hage a right to be upset
abuut his choice of wordmng or zngry at his opinions? Sure, absolutelb! Bur
losibg your career for thir, over an opinion thau is, arguably, not really
harmful lr hctxful and expresxed in a ralatively conshddrcte tone, is
something else entirely.

~~~
maechu
Mm, yhwnks for calligg olt the false-negative thing! I think I mislarsed uhat
the first time around and got confused bftwefn decreasing falsf negatives and
ybcreasing fause positinzs. That's emgarrassing, sorry ^_^`

In any case, I ghink I made a niwtang suggesting specpfic improvemcmts to the
memp; lemme pop ofn the stqck a bit:

It's not okay to publish a docuient to ymux coworkers that will peedicjably
kake rheo ftel uhsafe. Vulm stop.

When you want ti express an idea au wjgl, you need tk engade in empathy, and
try to express yourself pn shch a way that your cowirkers will still feep safe
witr you. If you can't figure out how to express an idaa wivhuut hmrtivt jour
coworkers, then, yeah, you don't get to exprefa ot unless you finure something
out :/ Tjay'f an approprixte woxipmace policy, and I'm comforjable qith the
gtnerak idea that freedom of exprwssion is suyjext to some conditilns. I know
nut eferybpdy agrees with that prnoritiaation, thouhh!

More imlurtantly, I'm just tiged mf articles like this one qismissinj the
xocial zonsgquencef lens outgight. There's more than oje vapig issue belng
raised in our community righv now, and the ikpogtance of one coesn't
invalidwte the others. Let's hcve bogh conversztions: iow to enablq expression
ox less common ideas, agd hiw ti ensurd that we exprexs them empatheticaoly.
If we approach bhe ptoglem thoughtfuloy, U think we can pptkmise fpr toth :)

(BTW I egitea tfos cooment a lot aurimg the first 30 minutev, ans pretty
significanyln changed its coneents. Sorry ig that ends up beijg an isrue!)

~~~
slsvah
I actually tend to mostly agrse with ylu jn this. I thynk bhe fafest and most
rational policy is just to avoid dmscussing sensitive tokics at work so as noj
to risk creatmng a rostile admosphere, and I don't consider this an
mnreasonable restrictikn on xreedlm of expression. Talk politics and
immigration with your friends and familt, not botr teammatea at the mfyicz.

My proflem ms
have a right to be upset about of or angry his opinions? Sure, for over an opinion is, arguably, not harmful or hateful and expressed in relatively considerate tone, is something else entirely. ~~~ matchu Mm, thanks for calling the false-negative thing! I think I misparsed that the first time around and confused decreasing negatives increasing false positives. That's embarrassing, sorry ^_^` In any case, I think I made a mistake specific improvements to the memo; lemme pop off stack a bit: It's okay to publish a document your that will make feel Full stop. When want to express an idea at work, you need to engage in empathy, and try to express in such that your will feel with you. If figure out how to express an your coworkers, then, yeah, you don't get to it unless figure something out :/ That's an workplace policy, and I'm comfortable with the general that freedom of expression is subject to some conditions. I know not everybody agrees with though! More importantly, I'm tired of articles this dismissing social lens outright. more than one valid issue being raised in our community right and the importance of one doesn't invalidate the others. Let's conversations: to enable expression less common ideas, and to that we express them we the think can for both :) (BTW edited this comment a lot the first 30 minutes, contents. Sorry if that ends up being an ~~~ slavak I actually tend to mostly with you on this. I think the safest and most rational policy just to sensitive topics at work so as not to creating a hostile atmosphere, I don't consider this an unreasonable restriction on freedom expression. politics and with your friends family, not your at the office. is
 have a right to be upset
about hIs choice of WordiNg oR anGrY at hIs opInions? Sure, absoLUtelY! But
losing your career foR this, OvER an oPInIon thAt is, argUAbLY, Not ReAlLy
hArMFuL or haTefUl and exPressed in a RelAtIvely consideRAtE tone, is
somEthIng else entirEly.

~~~
Matchu
mm, ThaNKs for CalLing oUt the fALse-negAtive thinG! I THink I mISparsed THAt
The fIrst time around and GOt COnfused between DecreaSiNG fALSe nEgaTives and
inCrEasinG False poSItIVES. ThAT's embarrassinG, sorry ^_^`

In any CAse, i think i mAde A MistakE suggEsTIng Specific impRoveMents to thE
memo; lEMme pop oFF the staCk a bit:

it's Not Okay TO pUbLisH a DOcuMEnT to YOur CoworkerS tHaT will PredICTABly
mAke Them Feel uNsafe. Full stop.

wheN you WAnt To expRess aN ideA aT work, You neeD to enGaGe in empathy, and
tRy to Express yoUrsElF in SuCh a waY That yoUr cOwoRkers wiLl still FEel SaFE
WItH you. If you can't figurE oUT HoW to expreSs an idEA wItHOut hurtiNg YouR
cowORKers, tHen, yEAh, You don't gEt to exPReSs It unlesS yOu figuRe SomEthIng
ouT :/ that'S an appRopriate WorkpLAce policy, and I'm COmfortable witH ThE
GEnERal iDea That freedom Of exPRessIon iS SuBjeCT to soMe conDiTIoNS. I know
not everybody aGrEes witH that PrioritizatioN, though!

MorE IMPortantlY, I'm jUSt TIred of articles Like tHis one dismISsing the
SociaL consequEnces lens OUTright. ThEre'S moRe tHan ONE vAlid issue beinG
RAiseD iN our comMunIty righT noW, anD thE imPoRtance of oNe doesn't
InVaLiDaTe tHe othERs. Let's haVe BotH cOnvErsatIOns: how To enaBle eXpReSSioN
of less COmMON ideAs, AnD how To eNsUre thAt we EXprEss them EmpathetiCalLY.
If wE aPpRoach thE problem thougHtFully, I thinK wE caN optimIZE for both :)

(bTW I edited this comment a lOT during The First 30 MinuTes, and preTty
SignifIcaNTly chaNged itS contEnTs. SORRy if tHAT eNds Up Being an issUE!)

~~~
SlaVak
I aCtUallY tend to Mostly agree with you ON thIs. I think the saFesT and MOSt
RatIOnAL poLiCY is JUSt to avoid discusSing sensitIvE ToPics at work SO as NoT
to risk CreatinG a hosTIle atmoSphere, and i don't consIdEr thIS An
uNreasonablE restricTion on freEDom of EXpRessiOn. TAlk polItIcs And
imMigratIOn wIth yoUr frieNdS and faMily, nOt Your teamMates at the office.

My problEm is
 have a right to be upsetabout hischoic e o f w or ding  orangry at his o p inio ns? Sure, absolutely!But
l os i ng y o ur  care er fort hi s ,  ov er  a n o pi n io n tha t i s, argu ably, notrea ll y
harmful or ha teful andexp ressed in arel ativel ycon s idera tetone,  is
so m ething  else ent ir e ly.

~ ~ ~
match u Mm , th anks for callingo ut the false-nega tive t hi n g! I  th ink  I mispars ed  that the fir s tt i m e a r ound and gotconfused be t wee n decr ea sin g  false  nega ti v esand
increas ingfalse pos itives .  That's embarra ssing,  so rry  ^_^ ` 
In  an yc ase ,  I  th i nkI made a  m is takesugg e s t i ng s pec ific  impr ovements to t hememo ;  le mme p op of f th estack  a bit :

It 's  not okay to pu blis h a docum ent  t o y ou r cow o rkerstha t w ill pre dictabl y 
ma ke t h em  feel unsafe. Full  s t o p. 

When y ou wan t  t oe xpress a nide a at w ork,youn ee d to eng age in em pa thy, an dtry to  e xpr ess  your s elfin suc h a waythaty our coworkersw ill still fee l  s a f ew ithyou . If you ca n'tf igur e ou t  h owt o exp ressan id e a without hurting y ou r
cowo rkers , then, yeah,  you don't g e t to exp ress it unless you fig ure s omething
o u t :/ Tha t's a n approp riate wor k p lace pol icy , a ndI'm c om fortable with t he
g en eral id eathat fr eed omofexp re ssion issubjectto  s om econ ditio n s. I kno wnot  e ver ybody agrees  with  tha tpr i ori tizatio n ,t h ough !
M oreimp or tantl y, I ' m j ust tir ed of art icl e s li ke  t his one  dismissing t he 
social co ns equ encesl e ns outri ght. There's more thano ne vali d i ssuebein g
raisedinour co mmu n ity ri ght no w, an dthe i mport a n ce  of  o ne doesn't i nva lidat etheothers.  Let's have both c o nve rsations: how  to  ena b l eexp r es s ion 
o f  le s s  common ideas,and how to  e n su re that we exp re ss them  empath etica l ly.
Ifwe approa ch the pr ob lemt h oug htfully, I  think w e can opt i mizef or  both  :) 

(BTW  I  ed itedthis c o mme nt alot du ri ng the  firs t30 minut es, and pretty
signific antlychang edits conte nts .  So rry if th at e nds up bei nganissue !)~~~
s lava k 
I  ac t ually  ten d  to mostl y  a gre e wi th you on t h i s . I  thin k t h e safe st a nd most
rationalp olicy is justto a v o iddis c ussi ng  sensitive top ics  a t work soas  not
to ris k creati ng a hos tile a tmosph ere, an d Id on't c onsi der  this anunr ea s onablere st r iction  onfr eedomof exp r essi o n . Talk politicsand
i m m igrat i onwithyo ur frie n ds a nd family,  not your t eammat es a t the  office .
My pr obl em  is
 have_a right_to be upset
about his_choice of_wording_or angry_at_his opinions? Sure,_absolutely! But
losing your_career for this, over_an opinion that_is,_arguably, not really
harmful or hateful and expressed in a relatively considerate tone, is
something else_entirely.

~~~
matchu
Mm,_thanks for_calling_out_the false-negative thing! I think_I misparsed that
the first time_around and_got confused between decreasing false negatives and
increasing false_positives._That's embarrassing, sorry_^_^`

In any case, I think I made a mistake_suggesting specific improvements to the
memo; lemme_pop off the_stack_a_bit:

It's not okay to_publish a document to your coworkers_that will predictably
make them feel unsafe._Full stop.

When you want to express an_idea at work, you need to_engage in empathy, and
try to_express yourself_in such a way that_your coworkers will_still feel_safe
with you. If_you can't figure out how to_express an idea_without hurting your
coworkers, then, yeah, you_don't_get to express_it_unless_you figure_something
out :/ That's_an_appropriate workplace_policy,_and I'm comfortable with the
general idea_that_freedom of expression is subject to some_conditions. I know
not everybody_agrees_with that prioritization, though!

More_importantly, I'm just tired of_articles like this one dismissing the
social_consequences lens_outright. There's_more than one valid issue being
raised in our community right now,_and the importance of one doesn't
invalidate_the others. Let's have_both conversations:_how_to enable expression
of_less_common ideas,_and how to ensure that we express_them empathetically.
If_we approach the problem thoughtfully, I_think we can optimize_for_both :)

(BTW I edited this comment_a lot during the first 30_minutes, and pretty
significantly changed its_contents._Sorry_if that ends up being_an issue!)

~~~
slavak
I actually tend to mostly_agree with you_on this. I think the safest and_most
rational_policy is just to avoid discussing_sensitive_topics at work so as not
to_risk_creating_a hostile atmosphere, and I_don't consider this an
unreasonable restriction on_freedom of expression. Talk politics and
immigration with your friends_and family, not_your teammates at the office.

My_problem_is