> We know they use Slack for internal communications
Yeah for non-sensitive things. Nobody discusses highly sensitive in a slack channel that can be seen by thousands of employees, especially something that is applicable to only some engineers.
> They've substantiated their side of the conversation
They have not. There is the obscure tweet from Leah Culver. Then, there is Casey saying he has screenshots with the ending of "subscribe to read more".
> You said you had friends at Twitter that disagree
Having friends at twitter is a common thing. There are 5000 engs there.
You said only some engineers are asked. Twitter has 5000 engs. It is not unbelievable that my friends are not asked anything.
Meanwhile reviewing code on paper is such a ridiculous thing to do. It is more painful for the reviewers themselves, meanwhile it takes an eng 1 minute to click print all. Why would they even ask for this? It doesn't even make sense.
Meanwhile you or Casey provides such a filmsy evidence and insist that this ridiculous story is absolutely true.
For one, I never said 'some engineers are asked', you made that up. The closest thing I said was 'multiple engineers were asked and shared that they were told to do so'. Which means we have anywhere from M confirmed to N unconfirmed.
Second, this is not a sensitive topic, given that we've seen someone an employee (according to you) make light of it. So either it's something that's fine to joke about (and therefore should be easy to disprove), or it's a 'sensitive matter' and Leah's tweet should probably be taken seriously.
And in either case, employees can and do talk about things like this in said Slack channels. All the time. Presumably it would be easy for your friends to ask their coworkers and their coworkers coworkers on Slack for confirmation. And for you to provide this evidence. That is my standard for verifying news, which you are not hitting.
> Second, this is not a sensitive topic, given that we've seen someone an employee (according to you) make light of it.
It is a sensitive topic.
Leah tweeted it obscurely that we can't tell whether it is a joke or the truth.
Leah Culver bought a house for 3m before the pandemic. The house is the iconic pink painted lady as her second house. She has a second house in SF. She doesn't need a job. She is rich as fuck. She wouldn't have endured this kind of brainless activity.
> Presumably it would be easy for your friends to ask their coworkers and their coworkers coworkers on Slack for confirmation
They did ask and didn't hear anything about it.
The caveat is that they aren't gonna ping execs or ask it in a public channel with thousands of employees in it. They gossip but in a tighter nit group.
The onus is on people who make ridiculous accusations. Having friends there is not ridiculous. My friends not hearing anything is also not ridiculous since twitter has 5000 engs. Reviewing code on paper is ridiculous. It is even bad for the reviewer
Yeah for non-sensitive things. Nobody discusses highly sensitive in a slack channel that can be seen by thousands of employees, especially something that is applicable to only some engineers.
> They've substantiated their side of the conversation
They have not. There is the obscure tweet from Leah Culver. Then, there is Casey saying he has screenshots with the ending of "subscribe to read more".
> You said you had friends at Twitter that disagree
Having friends at twitter is a common thing. There are 5000 engs there.
You said only some engineers are asked. Twitter has 5000 engs. It is not unbelievable that my friends are not asked anything.
Meanwhile reviewing code on paper is such a ridiculous thing to do. It is more painful for the reviewers themselves, meanwhile it takes an eng 1 minute to click print all. Why would they even ask for this? It doesn't even make sense.
Meanwhile you or Casey provides such a filmsy evidence and insist that this ridiculous story is absolutely true.
Please do have some standard for verifying news.