align-toparrow-leftarrow-rightbackbellblockcalendarcamerachatcheckchevron-downchevron-leftchevron-rightchevron-small-downchevron-small-leftchevron-small-rightchevron-small-upchevron-upcircle-with-crosscrosseditfacebookglobegoogleimagesinstagramlocation-pinmagnifying-glassmailmoremuplabelShape 3 + Rectangle 1outlookpersonplusImported LayersImported LayersImported Layersshieldstartwitteryahoo

RE: [newtech-1] Lean In

From: Carrie
Sent on: Sunday, March 17, 2013 9:41 PM

Klaus, you make an interesting point on the number of emails, but what about the number of participants in those threads (not to mention the quality of them)?  This is a list of 30,000 people from what I understand, but active participants seem to number in the dozens.  Often those super active threads are merely a few people engaged in name-calling. 

 

Most organizations adopt a code of civility so that those beyond the most aggressive feel comfortable contributing (I know a whole lot of shy people who don’t like being attacked but have pretty awesome perspectives to bring to conversations).  I will grant you that I don’t have definitive data (although I’m sure someone has studied this), but I have heard enough anecdotes about people’s trepidation in posting here to corroborate what I think is common sense (and listing their names as proof would be a pretty horrific betrayal of confidence). 

 

I think most members of the tech community would benefit from civil discourse that encouraged participation, but I leave that up to everyone to decide individually. 

 

 

From: [address removed] [mailto:[address removed]] On Behalf Of Klaus Sonnenleiter
Sent: Sunday, March 17,[masked]:30 PM
To: [address removed]
Subject: Re: [newtech-1] Lean In

 

Victor,

 

You bring up an interesting point. In the time I've been a member of this list, it appears that the threads commanding by far the highest participation rates were actually the ones where the wording had gotten ... shall we say, somewhat out of hand? Based on past history, this thread is remarkably benign. I remember waking up to more than a hundred posts in a single thread and every single one was either filled with insults or admonishments to refrain from insults.

 

So I'd have to say even in the absence of hard data (nobody has classified the various threads as inflammatory or not and then counted posts, as far as I know), it appears to me that throwing the occasional juicy flame one way or another hasn't discouraged participation yet ;-)

 

Klaus

 

On Mar 17, 2013, at 9:10 PM, Victor Shamanovsky wrote:



"they are counter-productive, and they deter people from actively participating."

Proof?

Thanks,

http://www.last.fm/music/GIGGA



Privileged/Confidential Information may be contained in this message. If you are not the addressee indicated in this message (or responsible for delivery of the message to such person), you may not copy or deliver this message to anyone.  In such case, you should destroy this message and kindly notify the sender by reply email. Please advise immediately if you or your employer do not consent to Internet email for messages of this kind.


On Mar 17, 2013, at 6:12 PM, Carrie <[address removed]> wrote:

Richard, honestly, that level of discourse is beneath this group.  My comment was not “sneaky,” but assumed you were intelligent enough to understand an indirect point.  Let me make that point more clearly:  the personal attacks you continuously make on this board are uncalled for.  They degrade professional conversations, they are counter-productive, and they deter people from actively participating.  Since there appears be some confusion over what a personal attack is, let me clarify it for you:  ad hominem arguments attack someone’s traits rather than their argument.  They are not only a logical fallacy, they are professionally inappropriate.  Feel free to read more here:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem

 

I chose to post this rather than email you privately because I would like that point to be heard by others who engage in the same type of behavior.  I am constantly surprised that intelligent people resort to personal cattiness- the more absurd you find someone’s argument, the more easily you should be able to dismantle it intellectually.  As for my original concluding comment, I hoped a gentle ribbing about the snarkiness on this email list might improve things.  Clearly that was a mistake, and I hope this direct approach is more effective. 

 

I must say, it’s ironic that you think I didn’t read your emails and assumed your position when you directly admitted that you did exactly that.  Further ironic that you wrote, “People will read what's written up until the point their mind has triggered an emotional respond [sic] to what they believe is being said, stop reading and insist on something that's not true.”   If you had not stopped reading  you would see that I responded- directly and unemotionally- to each of your points (after having read and considered them carefully).  And no, my emails are not the length of tweets because I think serious topics deserve the respect of complete, developed arguments.  I actually enjoy thoughtful, intellectual debate- with both men and women- and I appreciate Dean starting this conversation. 

 

I cannot imagine what gave you the impression I am angry, particularly with men.  I believe I stated that I have enjoyed career success in male-dominated fields, and I have been able to start and fund my own company in part because of the opportunities I was given by male superiors (on top of that, I am a Southern, football-loving newlywed and spend far too much money on my bras to ever consider burning them).  The only thing I am emotional about is the fact that there can’t be a thoughtful, intelligent conversation about the gender-specific delta in corporate leadership without women being accused of being angry, bitter, and unsuccessful- that makes me sad.  It makes far too many women hesitate to participate in the conversation (including me prior to this email chain) and prevents us from improving things for women in the future.   

 

I’ve been fortunate (or not, depending on your view I suppose) to have the personality and circumstances that allowed me to avoid the set-backs other women have faced.  That doesn’t mean I can’t comment on issues I see that could be addressed.  The only dog I have in this fight is a beautiful four year old niece who just told me she plans to build an app that will allow her to run the world (wisely, she’s keeping the details close to her vest).  I hope it’s a very long time before someone calls her a control freak and discourages her from speaking up.

 

From: [address removed] [mailto:[address removed]] On Behalf Of rburton
Sent: Saturday, March 16,[masked]:28 AM
To: [address removed]
Subject: Re: [newtech-1] Lean In

 

What kind of response do you think she was seeking with her statement? By the way, good job on trying to be sneaky with your personal attack much like Cynthia.

 

I stand by my opinions expressed in this mailing list. If you or Cynthia take disagree with my opinion, I have no issue with that. Cynthia's remark about how I should respond to an individual person was done to ignite such a response. If Cynthia wanted to address me personally, she has my e-mail and could e-mail me directly.

 

You've demonstrated the same behavior to ignite emotion, sadly your e-mail was by far to long to read.

 

I honestly believe that you and Cynthia are so caught up on some emotional anger of male vs. female that you didn't actually read my e-mails, but assumed you knew my position.

 

Your last e-mail was a complete failure because do you recall your attempt to insult all the men on the mailing list?

 

"I’d love to see a discussion of these (important) nuances, but I suspect the androgen balance on this list might favor snarky aggression instead."

 

Kudos and good night. You and Cynthia have my personal e-mail, feel free to contact me one on one if you so desire to continue this conversation. 

On Sat, Mar 16, 2013 at 12:09 AM, Carrie <[address removed]> wrote:

Ya, Cynthia, don’t be bossy!  J 

 

Richard, I generally think the personal attacks on this list degrade the conversation and are beneath the professionalism and intelligence of the subscribers (not to mention how they likely discourage many people from participating), but given how perfectly you illustrated the point from my first email with your pithy response below, I can only imagine it was done as the pinnacle of ironic wit.  Kudos. 

 

From: [address removed] [mailto:[address removed]] On Behalf Of rburton
Sent: Friday, March 15,[masked]:49 PM
To: [address removed]


Subject: Re: [newtech-1] Lean In

 

Rules by Cynthia - When being a control freak at home isn't enough.

 

On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 at 2:42 PM, Cynthia Schames <[address removed]> wrote:

Mr Burton, it's helpful when addressing one and only one member of this huge list to actually address them by name.

 

Or ideally to not be quite so caustic, but that's your call obvs. 

 



On Friday, March 15, 2013, Glen DaSilva wrote:

Sexism seems to be a hot topic today: Maria Bartiromo on CNBC’s Closing Bell today cites the book “Lean In” as ‘getting a lot of attention’ – CNBC must read this list to get a pulse! Topic: Successful Women vs. Men – watch at this link, the discussion happened 30 minutes ago:

http://video.cnbc.com/gallery/?play=1&video=3000153976

 

Telecommuting Uproar? It’s Because Mayer’s Female: CEO

http://www.cnbc.com/id/100529485

 

Published: Sunday, 10 Mar 2013 | 6:30 AM ET

By: Barbara Moran-Goodrich, CEO of Moran Family of Brands

My advice to women who are in similar situations is to do as Marissa Mayer has done, be unapologetic, unwavering, and decisive.”

 

Also tonight on Rock Center: Erin Callan, former Lehman CFO “don’t do it like me”:

http://rockcenter.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/03/15/17301962-former-lehman-cfo-erin-callan-dont-do-it-like-me?lite

 

 

 

From: [address removed] [mailto:[address removed]] On Behalf Of Michael Mellinger


Sent: Friday, March 15,[masked]:17 PM

To: [address removed]


Subject: Re: [newtech-1] Lean In

 

Richard, don't worry, it's not you, it's everyone else. Slam down a few Red Bulls and get back to work. 

-Mike

 


On Mar 15, 2013, at 1:00 PM, rburton <[address removed]> wrote:

Catharine, who the hell said they are poor leaders? Please re-read what I said and in the case you're too lazy, specifically read the example I gave with sports. Because you're athletic doesn't mean you'll want to play sports.

 

If you want to burn your bra in the sink, go for it. If you have some emotional issues about this topic, deal with them and don't project your hate on to me because you failed to read my email.

 

Like someone mentioned, these are opinions. Agree/disagree/ in the middle great, but if you're going to pretend that you know the answer, you're just fooling yourself.

 

Keep studying the topic while others raise to the ranks by applying themselves.


On Mar 15, 2013, at 8:09 AM, Catharine Fennell <[address removed]> wrote:





--
Please Note: If you hit "REPLY", y





--
Please Note: If you hit "REPLY", your message will be sent to everyone on this mailing list ([address removed])

This message was sent by Cynthia Schames ([address removed]) from NY Tech Meetup.
To learn more about Cynthia Schames, visit his/her member profile



 

--
-Richard L. Burton III





--
Please Note: If you hit "REPLY", your message will be sent to everyone on this mailing list ([address removed])

This message was sent by rburton ([address removed]) from NY Tech Meetup.
To learn more about rburton, visit his/her member profile

Meetup, POB 4668 #37895 NY NY USA 10163 | [address removed]





--
Please Note: If you hit "REPLY", your message will be sent to everyone on this mailing list ([address removed])

This message was sent by Carrie ([address removed]) from NY Tech Meetup.
To learn more about Carrie, visit his/her member profile



 

--
-Richard L. Burton III





--
Please Note: If you hit "REPLY", your message will be sent to everyone on this mailing list ([address removed])
This message was sent by rburton ([address removed]) from NY Tech Meetup.
To learn more about rburton, visit his/her member profile
Set my mailing list to email me As they are sent | In one daily email | Don't send me mailing list messages

Meetup, POB 4668 #37895 NY NY USA 10163 | [address removed]





--
Please Note: If you hit "REPLY", your message will be sent to everyone on this mailing list ([address removed])
This message was sent by Carrie ([address removed]) from NY Tech Meetup.
To learn more about Carrie, visit his/her member profile
Set my mailing list to email me As they are sent | In one daily email | Don't send me mailing list messages

Meetup, POB 4668 #37895 NY NY USA 10163 | [address removed]





--
Please Note: If you hit "REPLY", your message will be sent to everyone on this mailing list ([address removed])
This message was sent by Victor Shamanovsky ([address removed]) from NY Tech Meetup.
To learn more about Victor Shamanovsky, visit his/her member profile
Set my mailing list to email me As they are sent | In one daily email | Don't send me mailing list messages

Meetup, POB 4668 #37895 NY NY USA 10163 | [address removed]

 





--
Please Note: If you hit "REPLY", your message will be sent to everyone on this mailing list ([address removed])
This message was sent by Klaus Sonnenleiter ([address removed]) from NY Tech Meetup.
To learn more about Klaus Sonnenleiter, visit his/her member profile
Set my mailing list to email me As they are sent | In one daily email | Don't send me mailing list messages

Meetup, POB 4668 #37895 NY NY USA 10163 | [address removed]

Our Sponsors

People in this
Meetup are also in:

Sign up

Meetup members, Log in

By clicking "Sign up" or "Sign up using Facebook", you confirm that you accept our Terms of Service & Privacy Policy