Moderation Questions and General Chat Thread
The last iteration of the moderation discussion thread was a complete disaster. Numerous attempts to keep it on topic failed, and it became a general discussion thread with almost no moderation related posts at all. And those that were posted were so buried in non-mod posts that it became a huge time drain on the mods to sort through them. Then, when off topic posts were deleted posters complained about that.
This led to the closing of the mod discussion thread, replaced by the post report/pm approach. This has filtered out lots of noise, but has resulted at times in the General Discussion Thread turning into a quasi-mod thread. This is not desirable, but going back to the old mod thread is also not a workable option.
Therefore, I have created this new moderation thread, but with a different purpose and ground rules than previous mod threads. The purpose of this thread is to provide a place for posters to pose questions to the mods about how policies are applied; to bring to the mods attention posts they think are inappropriate and reach the level of requiring mod action; and for mods to communicate to posters things like changes or clarifications to policies, bannings, etc.
Now let me tell you what this thread is NOT a place for. It is not for nonmoderation related posts, even if the discussion originates from a comment in in a mod related post. It is not for posters to post their opinions about other posters or whether a poster should be banned. It is not to rehash past grievances about mod decisions from months or years ago. The focus of this thread will be recent posts that require action now. Or questions about current policies and enforcement.
So basically, this is a thread to ask mods questions. Which means, pretty much that only mods should be answering those questions. If a poster asks why a particular post was deleted or allowed, only a mod can answer that. Everyone else who wants to jump in with their opinion or their mod war story needs to stay out of it. It just increases the noise to signal ratio and does nothing to answer the question.
Everyone needs to understand that this thread has very different rules than the old mod thread and any other thread. Any non-moderation post will be deleted on sight. Not moved to the appropriate thread, just deleted. So don't waste your time crafting a masterpiece post about wars or transgender issues or the presidential election and then post it in this thread. It will be gone. Also, this isnt a thread for general commentary about our mods performance. Posting "browser sucks as a mod" or any such posts that don't actually ask about a policy or request a mod action will be deleted. Everyone is entitled to their opinion about the moderation of this forum. But this thread isnt for complaining about mods. You are free to go to the ATF forum and make your concerns about modding in this forum there.
So with that intro, this thread is open for those who need to bring questions about mod policies or bring inappropriate posts to the mods attention. Again, it is NOT a thread for group discussions about other posters or for other posters to answer questions directed to mods.
We'll see how this goes. If you have what you feel is an open issue raised in the General Discussion Thread, please copy that post or otherwise reintroduce the issue here.
Thanks.
I’m curious what 7 letter word I’m not thinking of that rococo said that was censored
Edit: now I’m assuming it’s *******?
Edit2: ok it’s *******
It’s a misogynist myth. Gloria Steinem once said “If women could sleep their way to the top, there’d be a lot more women at the top.”
cn, i think that's a misrepresentation of the trope
the trope is that they can sleep their way to the top of whatever pile is casually granted out by some man in charge
so it's not to own the company, nor even to manage the company, but rather something more reasonable like to be the highest paid person working their shift
i don't think i'm alone here in that i've personally witnessed throughout my lifetime instances where women gained favors/promotions for either outright sleeping with or allowing the man to think his chance of sleeping with her increased by granting the favor
in my last tech job, I was an early hire - like #12 or something, they had me reporting to this attractive woman who previously didn't really have any real role - yes she'd had the stanford degree and was a legitimately smart person - but it just didn't make any sense why this young woman held such a prominent position at the company given that she didn't have a specific role nor any experience to lean into - it was a bit surprising when the division i was brought in to build from scratch was put under her purview but i was ok with it because i still met with the ceo regularly anyway and she was actually a fellow autist and thus really fun to work with and i got along with her great
she had a saying that she used quite often "sometimes you just gotta suck a dick" and whenever i talked about something that would be unpleasant etc she'd just go with that phrase - as time went by and i got to know her better, i learned that she was met our lead investor at a tech event before she graduated at stanford and he "noticed her talent" and arranged for her to have an important role at one of his portfolio companies
a few months later, that guy got metoo'd and apparently this is what he did, he'd find attractive young women interested in careers in tech and in exchange for them being his mistresses he'd place them in high level and high paying jobs at his company - i once asked her about this and her straightforward autistic response was "duh, have i not been telling you all along sometimes you just gotta suck a dick?" she was being literal that entire time (some evidence against the notion i take everything literally)
and even before that, in the tech scene where befriending the right vcs can get you either directly funded or introduced with strong recs to others who will fund you - the amount of flirtation you see vcs receive from the attractive female founders at networking events was extreme
it was to the point where whenever i met an attractive female founder, i just naturally wondered if she had to combat investors trying to bang her and succeeded despite that battle or that she went along and succeeded in part due to that, and she either slept with or gave the impression she may sleep with her investors in order to rise above the pack and find funding
and anecdotally, the correlation between being physically attractive and a female founder is insanely high and I think a huge reason for this is due to survivorship bias - when a vc only funds 1% of the companies they meet with, just having a tiny edge will be incredibly helpful
i can think of a good dozen well above average looking female founders i know of first hand, and maybe 2-3 or i wasn't attracted to
i've seen instances of men sleeping their way to the top as well, but again, it's always with other men - never with women
while it's true that a lot of the "women sleep their way to the top" commentary is just a nice mask for misogynists to wear - there's basically nobody on this planet who hasn't either witnessed that happening directly nor deeply suspected that's why Janet got the promotion
rickroll, you are just going to get something along the lines of "I said it is a myth. END OF DISCUSSION."
Regarding your post, obviously Gloria Steinem's pithy quote is nonsense, as it is something that happens with enough regularity that pretty much anybody that actually works for a living has seen real-life examples in their work-lives.
My subjective experience is that I've never witnessed a woman trade sex for standing throughout any of my employment.
But the post is kind of missing the point. Kamala is going for President. I guess if you think the President is a puppet to the Illuminati and thus the office of the President is just a smaller pile to be doled out by the proverbial "they" then "alright". Otherwise, what are we even talking about here? Ashleigh scoring a middle management position at the local insurance office?
Thats not exactly what is implied by "the top"
Sigh
I think I just hate this thread
come on, everyone knows any time the top positions aren't all filled by straight white men that the meritocracy has been corrupted somehow
Although Monica Lewinsky was unable to move above the waistline, she still scored a mulitmillion settlement - which is why PWs business model wouldnt work irl.
It keeps getting worse
Monica was a 20-something girl who got slut-shamed and fat shamed relentlessly nationwide way before the internet was a thing. Also, federal persecutors threatened her with actual prison time. All for the crime of being a dumb girl who did an extremely vanilla sex act on the world's most powerful man.
Ahywho, carry on with the goofs.
i mean, does anyone actually think she was dating a powerful man 50 years her senior who just coincidentally managed to jump start her career by accident?
and frankly, if women were as shallow as men were to dole out that stuff for sex then (or perhaps they don't need to because it's much easier for them to get dick) then we'd see the same thing out of men
frankly, we'd get the same "men sleeping there way to the top" if the hetero/**** ratio were flipped and most people were gay - then the women could point to all the bjs guys like trump and obama gave out to advance their careers along the way
wait, i'm confused, did clinton paralyze her or is this bj slang?
i'm also don't think she blew him to get something out of it - something incredibly sexy about banging the leader of the world even if he weren't super charismatic like clinton was
We don't live in a hypothetical.
But, even if 35 years ago she "slept with a powerful man simply for the boost it would give to her career" that doesn't make the next 35 years in the public eye invalid.
I had a manager take a chance on me once for a position I had no business being in and that happened to work out for everyone, and neither one of us even had an orgasm.
Its the insistence on treating whatever happened as an invalidator or a sign of incompetence
you didn't answer the question and instead just moved the goal post - nobody here was talking about what she did after she sucked an 80 year old dick - they were talking about whether she sucked that dick for the love of the game or to advance her career
Probably a combination of both and other things
but for real, google search female founders - you'll find example after example of women who are significantly more attractive than the general population
you do not find that for male founders - either that or my latent homosexuality has a very odd kink working for me
there's a lot of space between "no woman has slept their way to power" and "every woman in power slept their way to the top"
there are also other explanations for why female founders might skew attractive. i'd argue male executives (straight or gay) skew above average in attractiveness.
my work experience is subjective and anecdotal, but for every woman in a senior position who was rumored to have gotten there for non-meritocratic reasons, i could count at least three highly competent middle-mgmt women punching way above their paygrade.
Successful people in general tend to be more attractive. I am sure there was a study about this back when I took social psychology in college. That attractive women tend to be more likely than non-attractive women to be successful in their careers, certainly does NOT mean that those women got there because of sexual favors. That's a bizarre take, and I don't see how an attractive female FOUNDER would even need to use sex to get to the top, when they are already the bosses.
I think it's obvious that the vast majority of women (or men) in business don't resort to underhanded tactics to get ahead, which would include trading for sexual favors, extortion, whatever. Still, it happens with enough regularity that if you work in any mid to large company, you will see it happen eventually.
Sorry to be crude here but if you can **** so good you make it all way to the presidency of the United States, that is world-class sexual prowess, absolute fire. I don't think that's what happened, but damn I wish I was that good in the sack.
It's not widely known, but in her younger days she also wrote a song about some of these experiences.
Spoiler
I don't see how an attractive female FOUNDER would even need to use sex to get to the top.
in the late stage sure, but a lot of things needed to go right in order to get there from getting seed funding, raising new funds, and getting clients/contracts
my very good buddy has an enterprise startup that on paper is thriving - it's been around nearly a decade, has many multinationals as clients, has about 50 employees worldwide, it's estimated valuation when you look it up online is over 100 million
his business has still never turned a profit
at least 4-5 different times he didn't have enough funds to cover payroll the following month but was able to secure a new round of funding, grant money, or big corporate contract in time to bail them out
in short, he's constantly in extremely difficult positions where a single person can fix all their short term problems
It’s a misogynist myth. Gloria Steinem once said “If women could sleep their way to the top, there’d be a lot more women at the top.”
She was also fond of the phrase "a woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle" which for me always summed up the supreme silliness of the 70s, and probably played some small part in a woman once shouting "Don't you hold a door open for me!" at 13 year old me in a busy high street, but that's the 70's for you.
As a fine riposte a Dadaist punk/jazz band released this...
