I agree on the point that allegations aren't true 100% of the time. And it is tragic when someone's reputation is irreparably tarnished as a result of a false accusation.
But it's important to keep in mind that the vast majority of rape accusations are true[1], and this likely carries over to accusations of sexual and gender-based harassment as well.
Statistically, it makes sense to give the accuser the benefit of the doubt. I'd rather unfairly tarnish the reputation of a small minority of the accused, than attack the reputation of the accusers (the vast majority of whom truly are victims of a terrible, heinous crime).
This doesn't mean that the accused shouldn't get a fair legal trial. But I think it does affect how they should be treated by the court of public opinion (until they are exonerated, in the rare cases where that actually happens).
Hm... how about treating both the accuser and the accused fairly and respectfully? E.g. by not revealing identities of either one of them until the case proceeds to trial.
It sickens me that you think people "should" be treated by the court of public opinion in any way.
I upvoted you, but, do we have to choose? Do we have to decide that one side or the other is lying? Can we treat accusations seriously without destroying the accused, and treat the accused's rights seriously without destroying the accuser?
EDIT It's said how comments here are flipping back and forth between black and grey like I was watching some sick checkerboard of humanity.
(I've actually been upvoting most of this conversation!)
I think we're actually on the same page -- I don't think personal attacks help at all. The whole point of Hacker News is to have interesting discussions, but personal attacks are not really very interesting.
And, I think (and I think you'd agree) that we have to take the victim's claims seriously so that we can learn more about how this happened and how we can avoid empowering someone like Mr. Mateen to carry out such reprehensible behavior in our own workplaces. That's the discussion that's worth having.
EDIT: Just wanted to add...this case is somewhat unique in that IAC has literally confirmed that Mr. Mateen sent harassing messages to Ms. Wolfe. I posted my first comment not because I wanted to attack Mr. Mateen, but because I'm getting tired of the typical flood of "oh this is just yet another unfounded accusation against some poor founder" FUD comments on these stories.
But it's important to keep in mind that the vast majority of rape accusations are true[1], and this likely carries over to accusations of sexual and gender-based harassment as well.
Statistically, it makes sense to give the accuser the benefit of the doubt. I'd rather unfairly tarnish the reputation of a small minority of the accused, than attack the reputation of the accusers (the vast majority of whom truly are victims of a terrible, heinous crime).
This doesn't mean that the accused shouldn't get a fair legal trial. But I think it does affect how they should be treated by the court of public opinion (until they are exonerated, in the rare cases where that actually happens).
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_accusation_of_rape#Estima...