Also known as snooggums on midwest.social and kbin.social.
I read it as Bob was fine with it as a concept but was letting OP know they came in too strong and probably pissed Alice off. Or Bob thinks Alice will be pissed off.
Based on the words in the post Bob is embarrassed about how OP approached Alice.
I asked Bob if he could introduce me to Alice so I can ask Alice 1) for help getting in touch with the hiring manager and 2) what the company culture is like. Bob said yes and I asked Alice my questions, with Bob CC’ed in the message.
This has seemed OK with most people. However Bob said my conversation with Alice seemed one sided and excessive and like I was taking advantage of him just to get to the hiring manager.
Was Bob upset because he didn’t know that was your intent or just letting you know that you didn’t handle the interaction well and that it makes him look bad?
Doing something that is common can still get push back if it isn’t handled well.
That stance is stupid as fuck. Getting a vaccine isn’t putting others first. It protects you and happens to have an extra benefit of protecting others as a treat.
The donation doesn’t go to a CEO who has murdered hundreds, possibly thousands of people.
It is going to someone who acted in defense of others. Or who might not be the person who even did that, which is why he deserves a fair trial.
Having it all in one instance so people who don’t like it are able to block it at the instance level is pretty awesome.
I like it.
Reverse discrimination isn’t a thing. It is a good sign that the person using the term is a moron because as you noted, discrimination is just discrimination.
But minorities and women having their own spaces isn’t discrimination. Women’s sports leagues isn’t discrimination. It is a response to being discriminated against for decades or centuries. So are black colleges, which were a response to being excluded from most universities. They exist because otherwise they wouldn’t have been able to do those things because of the actual discrimination. It simply isn’t the same thing at all because of the larger context.
On a side note, the whole transphobic ‘no trans women in women’s sports’ bullshit is discrimination because it further excludes an even smaller portion of the population that is discriminated against even more than women.
Exclusive spaces for women and minorities while requiring male spaces to accept women and minorities. Like women or black only colleges and associations.
Sorry fellow white dudes, we still have so many comparative advantages and there is too much systemic racism and misogyny left to address before a white or men only club is in any way comparable.
How do you validate the accuracy of what it spits out?
Why don’t you skip the AI and just use the thing you use to validate the AI output?
The dumbed down text is basically as long as the prompt. Plus you have to double check it to make sure it didn’t have outrage instead of outage just like if you wrote it yourself.
How do you know the answer on why RIP was replaced with RIPv2 is accurate and not just a load of bullshit like putting glue on pizza?
Are you really saving time?
Soinds like Bob thought you were too direct and too fast in asking a lot of questions instead of ‘getting to know’ Alice or something along those lines by calling it one sided. That could be a valid complaint, since most people don’t want to be contacted for a list of specific questions that will have answers in their email history. They mostly want to volunteer what they are comfortable first and maybe answer follow up questions. Like I wouldn’t answer a question about ‘bosses being on everyone all the time’ or if coworkers complain all the time in an email.
Bob could also be wrong and making a huge deal out of nothing too. I’ve worked with a few people who assume the worst from and email exchange without actually talking to the people involved. But more likely you came on way too strong too fast and if you worded it that way in the email then your approach was too strong for someone you don’t know.