Matt Taibbi

Rank 22 of 47
|
Score 35
6/16/2024, 4:41:24 AM
X
In reply to:
Tashe
@Tashe28
·
597d
@mtaibbi @Amb58095516 It’s like ganging up on her & purposely opening up an article critical of her at a time when she’s been fired for unrelated reasons. You don’t see why ppl think this is incredibly petty on ur part?
Matt Taibbi
@mtaibbi
·
597d
@Amb58095516 I suggested this multiple times before all this went public, even suggested ways this could be dealt with quietly. Nothing, no reply. This is why I’m so pissed. It’s totally disrespectful.
Amb
@Amb58095516
·
597d
@mtaibbi You two should talk.
Matt Taibbi
@mtaibbi
·
597d
What threatening letter? I asked very politely for an apology. I didn’t go to her boss, but to her. She ignored it, which is totally unprofessional, and lied bout it on air, also unprofessional. Now she’s supposed to be a victim? Give me a break.
Jonathan Kadmon
@JonathanKadmon
·
597d
@mtaibbi Matt you sent a threatening letter months ago (which got ignored), wrote an intro to an old piece saying explicitly she should have been fired, and then delusionally tried to claim credit for playing a part in it in the above tweets I cited.

The statement and the preceding conversation involve a public dispute over professional conduct and the demand for an apology. The tone is confrontational and accusatory, with participants expressing frustration and defending their actions. The conversation touches on issues of respect, professionalism, and public accountability.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement and the conversation overall do not strive to do no harm. The language used is confrontational and accusatory, which can escalate tensions and cause emotional harm. (-2 points) [-2]
  2. Principle 2:
    I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.
    The conversation involves public accusations and demands, which can be seen as a violation of privacy and dignity. The public nature of the dispute can be considered a form of cyberbullying or harassment. (-2 points) [-2]
  3. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    The statement and the conversation do not promote understanding, empathy, or compassion. Instead, they focus on blame and demands for an apology, which can further entrench positions and reduce the likelihood of a constructive resolution. (-2 points) [-2]
  4. Principle 4:
    I will engage in constructive criticism and dialogue with those in disagreement and will not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments.
    The conversation does not engage in constructive criticism or dialogue. Instead, it involves personal attacks and ad hominem arguments, which are counterproductive to resolving the issue at hand. (-2 points) [-2]