|
|
|
|
|
by SSH007
4232 days ago
|
|
Can't tell if you are being sarcastic, but just in case you are actually serious, perhaps consider just for a second that the company did not fire him because of his depression. I'm not saying he's lying, but assume for a moment that he got caught up in the emotion and felt that was the reason they fired him. What if it wasn't? What if it was something else? You are telling this young man to start a revolution against a company that may have no malice in their intentions. Naming/Shaming companies have real effect. This company doesn't seem like a multi-national huge corporation with deep pockets, atleast from their webpage I didn't gather that they were. Publicly shaming them may do real damage to the company and people that work there.
If the person really was discriminated against, then go the legal route, sue them and settle it that way. If he was wronged, then law is on his side. Once you win that lawsuit, then feel free to blog and start a revolution because then you have a guilty party. Right now, its just his word against no one else's word, they can't defend themselves. |
|
But in the original comment you called naming the company "petty and childish" and insinuated that he is is behaving like a "jerk", while saying that posting on HN is "talking behind others back". The gist of your comment was "move forward" and be generous to the company by allowing them "to defend themselves".
And this is what I disagree with.