Stardock Lawsuit Getting Ugly

If you don't have a backup of your "years worth of marketing data" when you suck at running a company. Someone allegedly deleting data on their account should have zero bearing on whether that data still exists in backup sets.

In summary: Stop lying Wardell!
 
To the people who say "If things were so bad,why didn't she quit sooner?",equality in the workplace has a long way to go. Especially in corporate positions. Knowing these types of guys,he probably waited until she was well committed to the job before showing his real nature. By that time she probably didn't want to sacrifice her career knowing how hard it would be to start over somewhere else in this economy.
 
damicatz said:
Where did I say he had the right to touch an employee? I specifically stated that touching, if it happened, was wrong because that is a violation of her right to control her own body and inappropriate touching constitutes an initiation of force.
Click to expand...

This is the least of the concerns about your argumentative points, but I just wanted to mention that touching is not de facto bad. From the limited information in this case, he touched her hair. This is a normal, natural gesture from many people with no ill intent. It's when someone lets the other person know this is unwanted (and why), that it becomes an interesting issue and we can start using the term, "inappropriate." It also is framed differently when we're talking employee/employer relationships as well as any protected classes, specifically on the employee part of that situation.

In a way, this simple example illustrates your strange judgemental position...
 
*shrugs* It seems like the woman was a bit too sensitive. She did voice her concern about the situation in a respectable way, and while the guy was a bit of a dick in a portion of his response - I don't think he really did anything wrong. He apologized for the way he made her feel, but wasn't about to apologize for the way he talks to his friends and other people outside of work. I agree with the "if you don't like how I act in my personal time, then go find another job". If she's uncomfortable with him, then she could simply not hang out around him unless they're at work, working. They were at a pub for fucks sake.

It may have been fine had she just quit and found another job, but the fact that she wiped data and fucked them over simply because she was being pouty about his vulgarity makes this look bad on her, and not the guy, in my opinion. It all comes down to "it's her fault" for me.
 
Sure are lots of white knights here...


Do you know ALL the facts of this case? No, you don't. Yet you're all assuming she's telling the whole truth just because she's a woman. Just admit it.

At least PRETEND like you're impartial since, you know, you don't know jack **** about the case other than what she said.
 
Raudulfr said:
Sure are lots of white knights here...


Do you know ALL the facts of this case? No, you don't. Yet you're all assuming she's telling the whole truth just because she's a woman. Just admit it.

At least PRETEND like you're impartial since, you know, you don't know jack **** about the case other than what she said.
Click to expand...

You are right we don't know everything but you can sure pick up some details out from the article and court docs. Dismissal was refused and the case is going to trial. The info in the article implies that it is more than just her word against his, there is evidence to back her up otherwise I highly doubt they would be going to trial. Emails and witness depositions...he may not be guilty but it sure doesn't sound good for him.
 
Raudulfr said:
Sure are lots of white knights here...


Do you know ALL the facts of this case? No, you don't. Yet you're all assuming she's telling the whole truth just because she's a woman. Just admit it.

At least PRETEND like you're impartial since, you know, you don't know jack **** about the case other than what she said.
Click to expand...

Wrong. We also know what he said. " I am an inappropriate, sexist, vulgar, and embarrassing person and I'm not inclined to change my behavior." His own words.
I'm not assuming she's telling the truth because she's a woman,but I'm pretty certain he's an egotistical jerk who assumes his position makes him immune to the rules of acceptable behavior.
 
I think it's as simple as: if she doesn't want to be offended by someone's vulgarity, then she shouldn't hang out around them at a pub outside of work hours.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top