JustinHanagan"Trust and Safety" departments exist to protect the company, not users.
https://open.substack.com/pub/staygrounded/p/the-trust-and-safety-dance?r=tv8a1
beanWhy users are always the ones screwed?
fuboA “user” is anyone who walks through the public park and picks up a gadget that someone else left there.
They poke at it for a while, not knowing who built it or who dropped it in the park. It does some cool stuff.
Sometimes they can wiggle it and it makes colors that their friends enjoy. Maybe someone built this thing just to be a fun toy to play with?
They put it in their pants pocket and walk on.
Once in a while, the thing they picked up in the park just spontaneously catches fire and burns their pants off, leaving them naked in the middle of the town square and really embarrassed.
But usually, a “user” can mess around with technology crap and not get burned.
Until, y’know, they do.
And then it’s supposed to be their fault.
Hey, thing-builders: If the thing you built hurts people, you should fix that. “They picked it up, it’s okay if it burns their pants off” is not a good excuse.
While I agree with your premise, people also need to be aware that some random thing they started fiddling with can be problematic, and should maybe do some basic research on what they’re fiddling with. We absolutely need to hold creators responsible for their creations, but this also shouldn’t absolve people of using their brains and thinking critically.
gregorumThen it should at least come with a warning label, and perhaps, with the ability to block children from picking it up or playing with it.
I think its morally acceptable to make products designed to hurt the user and other people.
Uranium3006"Useds" is a more appropriate term
Trust and Safety? Is this the new buzzword for HW, a la People Empowerment?
FaceDeerAt my previous company the department went through various names over the years, ending up as "People Experience" when we parted ways.
I think Trust and Safety would probably be for an analogous department focused on the users, not the employees.
That would be people & culture
I’ve seen them use Tallent and Culture unironically. Yes and also shorten it to T&C
AdaIt’s hard to think the author’s concern is too genuine given that they’re publishing on Substack
I have many issues with Substack, but at least they're not disingenuous about what you may find there (if they even have a T&S dept!).
Sure, but that doesn’t let you off the hook for using them. You’re on a site that empowers people who want people like me dead. It’s hard to think you’re too concerned about my rights as a worker, when you’re not terribly interesting in defending my human rights
OP literally said they’re gonna stop using it, “now that they’ve been made aware of their stance.” Wtf more do you want? You want people to be omniscient? To know something before they know it? I don’t understand how you’re holding someone accountable for a lack of knowledge. That’s asinine.
I’m not sure whether I missed that or it was edited, but either way, I didn’t see it when I posted.
Mea culpa if I missed it
Ahh, that makes a lot more sense.
rushWe shouldn’t judge people for past decisons when new info comes out, especially when that new info makes them change. It will take some time for people to move and find a viable alternative.
I do not intend this to be an attack of any kind, please be more considerate of the fact that changes can’t be made instantly when you have an audience to move.
Everything in a corporation exists to benefit the corporation.
Down voted because substack enables nazis.
setVeryLoud(true);Good lad/die, fuck substack