Skip to content
Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Twitter)   Conde Nast site director posts ad looking for 'full time freelancer' meaning 1099 employee with no benefits. @NYSLabor chimes in, does not seem amused   (twitter.com) divider line
    More: Amusing, location information, precise location, World Wide Web, Tweets, Tweet location history, option, city, web  
•       •       •

1311 clicks; posted to Business » on 13 Mar 2019 at 12:13 PM (7 days ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



24 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2019-03-13 11:19:38 AM  
Original Tweet:

 
2019-03-13 12:33:40 PM  
Womp womp.
 
2019-03-13 12:35:17 PM  
I saw the Twitter thread on Tamarkin's OP... let's just say the digital pitchforks and torches were deployed in force.  Torch the bastards!
 
2019-03-13 12:45:27 PM  
For those not terribly familiar with employment scams like this: freelance work is independent contracting, in which the freelancer determines the quantity of work they want to take on, performed in a way and to a level mutually agreed upon by the company and the contractor.  The tradeoff is a boost in flexibility and autonomy against a lack of benefits and labor protections.  Conde Nast is, however, seeking a full-time employee to treat like a full-time employee in terms of responsibility but an independent contractor in terms of pay.

Reading others' takes from perspectives more familiar with the industry, it appears that they're also calling this an "entry level" position (i.e. low pay) but the duties and responsibilities of experienced/managing editorial staff (i.e. high level, long hours).

The quiet part was tweeted out loud.
 
2019-03-13 01:06:32 PM  
Conde Nasty
 
2019-03-13 01:07:45 PM  
So I'm not really sure what is "wrong" about so-called "snitch tagging" in the first place. If you are publicly trashing someone why shouldn't the person you are trashing know about it? The person notifying them is even being open about the act.

Like I get why the act can cause shiat with people, but isn't the original action responsible for that? It's not like people can't see public posts about themselves if they aren't tagged. If you don't want people to respond to you being an asshole online, maybe you just shouldn't be an asshole online?
 
2019-03-13 01:42:31 PM  

OptimisticCynicism: So I'm not really sure what is "wrong" about so-called "snitch tagging" in the first place. If you are publicly trashing someone why shouldn't the person you are trashing know about it? The person notifying them is even being open about the act.

Like I get why the act can cause shiat with people, but isn't the original action responsible for that? It's not like people can't see public posts about themselves if they aren't tagged. If you don't want people to respond to you being an asshole online, maybe you just shouldn't be an asshole online?


I think they're probably talking about someone complaining about neighbors smoking pot or some minor annoyance like that.
 
2019-03-13 01:45:39 PM  

OptimisticCynicism: So I'm not really sure what is "wrong" about so-called "snitch tagging" in the first place. If you are publicly trashing someone why shouldn't the person you are trashing know about it? The person notifying them is even being open about the act.

Like I get why the act can cause shiat with people, but isn't the original action responsible for that? It's not like people can't see public posts about themselves if they aren't tagged. If you don't want people to respond to you being an asshole online, maybe you just shouldn't be an asshole online?


It's just an extension of a typical right-wing attitude: The person who indirectly brought the consequences for your actions to you is the one who is responsible for whatever you suffer as a result of those consequences.  In other words, it's just more deflection of personal responsibility.
 
2019-03-13 02:09:42 PM  

Arkanaut: OptimisticCynicism: So I'm not really sure what is "wrong" about so-called "snitch tagging" in the first place. If you are publicly trashing someone why shouldn't the person you are trashing know about it? The person notifying them is even being open about the act.

Like I get why the act can cause shiat with people, but isn't the original action responsible for that? It's not like people can't see public posts about themselves if they aren't tagged. If you don't want people to respond to you being an asshole online, maybe you just shouldn't be an asshole online?

I think they're probably talking about someone complaining about neighbors smoking pot or some minor annoyance like that.


So i went down the rabbit hole a bit and it really isn't. The LA Times article the guy linked is criticizing making people aware of shiat said about them.

From the article:
"It's a move that pulls both the critic and the criticized into a digital confrontation that neither of them asked for."

Of course I think that is horseshiat because the critic asked for it by making a public statement.
 
2019-03-13 03:04:49 PM  

OptimisticCynicism: Arkanaut: OptimisticCynicism: So I'm not really sure what is "wrong" about so-called "snitch tagging" in the first place. If you are publicly trashing someone why shouldn't the person you are trashing know about it? The person notifying them is even being open about the act.

Like I get why the act can cause shiat with people, but isn't the original action responsible for that? It's not like people can't see public posts about themselves if they aren't tagged. If you don't want people to respond to you being an asshole online, maybe you just shouldn't be an asshole online?

I think they're probably talking about someone complaining about neighbors smoking pot or some minor annoyance like that.

So i went down the rabbit hole a bit and it really isn't. The LA Times article the guy linked is criticizing making people aware of shiat said about them.

From the article:
"It's a move that pulls both the critic and the criticized into a digital confrontation that neither of them asked for."

Of course I think that is horseshiat because the critic asked for it by making a public statement.


I think part of the problem is, some idiot posts something on Twitter to a few buddies that follow him. Not thinking it realizing that just because he's only got a few followers it's still publicly available.

Then someone gets wind on it, tags the person who was the topic of said stupid tweet and now you have the someone being a snitch.

So yes, it's public, but many people are idiots and don't realize that things get out from their little circle.
 
2019-03-13 03:12:19 PM  
lol
 
2019-03-13 03:18:44 PM  

Unoriginal_Username: OptimisticCynicism: Arkanaut: OptimisticCynicism: So I'm not really sure what is "wrong" about so-called "snitch tagging" in the first place. If you are publicly trashing someone why shouldn't the person you are trashing know about it? The person notifying them is even being open about the act.

Like I get why the act can cause shiat with people, but isn't the original action responsible for that? It's not like people can't see public posts about themselves if they aren't tagged. If you don't want people to respond to you being an asshole online, maybe you just shouldn't be an asshole online?

I think they're probably talking about someone complaining about neighbors smoking pot or some minor annoyance like that.

So i went down the rabbit hole a bit and it really isn't. The LA Times article the guy linked is criticizing making people aware of shiat said about them.

From the article:
"It's a move that pulls both the critic and the criticized into a digital confrontation that neither of them asked for."

Of course I think that is horseshiat because the critic asked for it by making a public statement.

I think part of the problem is, some idiot posts something on Twitter to a few buddies that follow him. Not thinking it realizing that just because he's only got a few followers it's still publicly available.

Then someone gets wind on it, tags the person who was the topic of said stupid tweet and now you have the someone being a snitch.

So yes, it's public, but many people are idiots and don't realize that things get out from their little circle.


Yeah, I do think that is the case. However, it's still the fault of either the platform (for encouraging global broadcasting being the default form of communication) or the idiots for acting without thinking of consequences.
 
2019-03-13 04:35:04 PM  
Thats how you turn your 100,000 degree into a 33,000 a year job. Hopefully, your folks will be fine with you living with them.
 
2019-03-13 06:00:33 PM  

OptimisticCynicism: Unoriginal_Username: OptimisticCynicism: Arkanaut: OptimisticCynicism: So I'm not really sure what is "wrong" about so-called "snitch tagging" in the first place. If you are publicly trashing someone why shouldn't the person you are trashing know about it? The person notifying them is even being open about the act.

Like I get why the act can cause shiat with people, but isn't the original action responsible for that? It's not like people can't see public posts about themselves if they aren't tagged. If you don't want people to respond to you being an asshole online, maybe you just shouldn't be an asshole online?

I think they're probably talking about someone complaining about neighbors smoking pot or some minor annoyance like that.

So i went down the rabbit hole a bit and it really isn't. The LA Times article the guy linked is criticizing making people aware of shiat said about them.

From the article:
"It's a move that pulls both the critic and the criticized into a digital confrontation that neither of them asked for."

Of course I think that is horseshiat because the critic asked for it by making a public statement.

I think part of the problem is, some idiot posts something on Twitter to a few buddies that follow him. Not thinking it realizing that just because he's only got a few followers it's still publicly available.

Then someone gets wind on it, tags the person who was the topic of said stupid tweet and now you have the someone being a snitch.

So yes, it's public, but many people are idiots and don't realize that things get out from their little circle.

Yeah, I do think that is the case. However, it's still the fault of either the platform (for encouraging global broadcasting being the default form of communication) or the idiots for acting without thinking of consequences.


I would go with the idiots. Twitter in no way indicates anything other then DM's are private. And like the rest of the internet, it's forever and accessible to anyone that wants what ever you put up here.
 
2019-03-13 06:51:41 PM  

Unoriginal_Username: OptimisticCynicism: Unoriginal_Username: OptimisticCynicism: Arkanaut: OptimisticCynicism: So I'm not really sure what is "wrong" about so-called "snitch tagging" in the first place. If you are publicly trashing someone why shouldn't the person you are trashing know about it? The person notifying them is even being open about the act.

Like I get why the act can cause shiat with people, but isn't the original action responsible for that? It's not like people can't see public posts about themselves if they aren't tagged. If you don't want people to respond to you being an asshole online, maybe you just shouldn't be an asshole online?

I think they're probably talking about someone complaining about neighbors smoking pot or some minor annoyance like that.

So i went down the rabbit hole a bit and it really isn't. The LA Times article the guy linked is criticizing making people aware of shiat said about them.

From the article:
"It's a move that pulls both the critic and the criticized into a digital confrontation that neither of them asked for."

Of course I think that is horseshiat because the critic asked for it by making a public statement.

I think part of the problem is, some idiot posts something on Twitter to a few buddies that follow him. Not thinking it realizing that just because he's only got a few followers it's still publicly available.

Then someone gets wind on it, tags the person who was the topic of said stupid tweet and now you have the someone being a snitch.

So yes, it's public, but many people are idiots and don't realize that things get out from their little circle.

Yeah, I do think that is the case. However, it's still the fault of either the platform (for encouraging global broadcasting being the default form of communication) or the idiots for acting without thinking of consequences.

I would go with the idiots. Twitter in no way indicates anything other then DM's are private. And like the rest of the internet, it's forever and accessible to ...


So i do think in a personal accountability sense you're right. I more was talking about Twitter designing what could be considered a toxic ecosystem. If Twitter is catering to idiots goofing off in small groups, they could easily optimize their design to make that stupid easy. Instead Twitter would rather you make a much noise as possible. That is because Twitter wants to create more interactions and streams of information because that is what they use to make their platform valuable to users. Kind of like how Facebook was valuable to users because people they knew were probably already using it.
 
2019-03-13 07:20:20 PM  

Catlenfell: Thats how you turn your 100,000 degree into a 33,000 a year job. Hopefully, your folks will be fine with you living with them.


it's how companies turn 3 jobs into 1 job, by claiming it's entry level and hiring you as a "freelancer" that only works for them while denying you overtime and benefits! Use young rubes desperate for a job!

Seriously they want a SEO Expert, a professional chef, and a writer/food journalist in one  job.

This is a trend in the tech industry that I've been dealing with a lot lately.  I interviewed for a job that was a IT BA/PM & Data Visualization, GIS, & BI specialist! for 75k a year, no benefits! (Contract)
 
2019-03-13 07:55:09 PM  

shortymac: Catlenfell: Thats how you turn your 100,000 degree into a 33,000 a year job. Hopefully, your folks will be fine with you living with them.

it's how companies turn 3 jobs into 1 job, by claiming it's entry level and hiring you as a "freelancer" that only works for them while denying you overtime and benefits! Use young rubes desperate for a job!

Seriously they want a SEO Expert, a professional chef, and a writer/food journalist in one  job.

This is a trend in the tech industry that I've been dealing with a lot lately.  I interviewed for a job that was a IT BA/PM & Data Visualization, GIS, & BI specialist! for 75k a year, no benefits! (Contract)


Could just be HR compliance when they have an internal candidate. Granted, small teams sometimes have people wear a lot of hats.
 
2019-03-13 07:55:26 PM  

shortymac: This is a trend in the tech industry that I've been dealing with a lot lately.


Full Stack! DevSecOps!  *jazz hands*
 
2019-03-13 09:25:49 PM  

TheSubjunctive: shortymac: This is a trend in the tech industry that I've been dealing with a lot lately.

Full Stack! DevSecOps!  *jazz hands*


*Jazz hands*
Agile
What's it called?
Agile
Once again
Agile

But we're a government entity with an aging, complicated, custom built but absolutely essential application that no one has the guts to replace FFS. Agile wasn't intended for this!
Sorry, Shortymac, the execs have spoken
Agile!
Agile!
Agile!
Agile!

Seriously, at my last job the new CIO sweeped in like Lyle Lanley and charmed the execs that agile was going to magically solve our problems.

Dude laid off some long time employees right away and then did nothing but preach for a few months, then went on paternity leave for a year suddenly under mysterious circumstances (after denying another employees paternity leave after he had a premie bc that employee was deemed essential).

The execs then tried to demote "Lyle" when he came back, he sued (rightfully, it's illegal) and then left with an undisclosed amount of money.

Meanwhile, I along with dozens of other regular employees where on revolving contracts, leading to brain drain and constantly having to train new people in a custom application.
 
2019-03-13 09:34:58 PM  

OptimisticCynicism: shortymac: Catlenfell: Thats how you turn your 100,000 degree into a 33,000 a year job. Hopefully, your folks will be fine with you living with them.

it's how companies turn 3 jobs into 1 job, by claiming it's entry level and hiring you as a "freelancer" that only works for them while denying you overtime and benefits! Use young rubes desperate for a job!

Seriously they want a SEO Expert, a professional chef, and a writer/food journalist in one  job.

This is a trend in the tech industry that I've been dealing with a lot lately.  I interviewed for a job that was a IT BA/PM & Data Visualization, GIS, & BI specialist! for 75k a year, no benefits! (Contract)

Could just be HR compliance when they have an internal candidate. Granted, small teams sometimes have people wear a lot of hats.


This was a large government entity that required meeting and dealing with issues with other large government entities. Most of these have been with large organizations.

I don't mind wearing many hats, however I do want my job to realistically do-able with a single person working 40 hours a week.
 
6 days ago  

shortymac: TheSubjunctive: shortymac: This is a trend in the tech industry that I've been dealing with a lot lately.

Full Stack! DevSecOps!  *jazz hands*

*Jazz hands*
Agile
What's it called?
Agile
Once again
Agile

But we're a government entity with an aging, complicated, custom built but absolutely essential application that no one has the guts to replace FFS. Agile wasn't intended for this!
Sorry, Shortymac, the execs have spoken
Agile!
Agile!
Agile!
Agile!

Seriously, at my last job the new CIO sweeped in like Lyle Lanley and charmed the execs that agile was going to magically solve our problems.

Dude laid off some long time employees right away and then did nothing but preach for a few months, then went on paternity leave for a year suddenly under mysterious circumstances (after denying another employees paternity leave after he had a premie bc that employee was deemed essential).

The execs then tried to demote "Lyle" when he came back, he sued (rightfully, it's illegal) and then left with an undisclosed amount of money.

Meanwhile, I along with dozens of other regular employees where on revolving contracts, leading to brain drain and constantly having to train new people in a custom application.


On one gov't contract the customer decided on an agile/waterfall hybrid complete with hard milestones.

Which just seemed like a waterfall development cycle with more status meetings.
 
6 days ago  

OptimisticCynicism: Unoriginal_Username: OptimisticCynicism: Unoriginal_Username: OptimisticCynicism: Arkanaut: OptimisticCynicism: So I'm not really sure what is "wrong" about so-called "snitch tagging" in the first place. If you are publicly trashing someone why shouldn't the person you are trashing know about it? The person notifying them is even being open about the act.

Like I get why the act can cause shiat with people, but isn't the original action responsible for that? It's not like people can't see public posts about themselves if they aren't tagged. If you don't want people to respond to you being an asshole online, maybe you just shouldn't be an asshole online?

I think they're probably talking about someone complaining about neighbors smoking pot or some minor annoyance like that.

So i went down the rabbit hole a bit and it really isn't. The LA Times article the guy linked is criticizing making people aware of shiat said about them.

From the article:
"It's a move that pulls both the critic and the criticized into a digital confrontation that neither of them asked for."

Of course I think that is horseshiat because the critic asked for it by making a public statement.

I think part of the problem is, some idiot posts something on Twitter to a few buddies that follow him. Not thinking it realizing that just because he's only got a few followers it's still publicly available.

Then someone gets wind on it, tags the person who was the topic of said stupid tweet and now you have the someone being a snitch.

So yes, it's public, but many people are idiots and don't realize that things get out from their little circle.

Yeah, I do think that is the case. However, it's still the fault of either the platform (for encouraging global broadcasting being the default form of communication) or the idiots for acting without thinking of consequences.

I would go with the idiots. Twitter in no way indicates anything other then DM's are private. And like the rest of the internet, it's forever and accessible to ...

So i do think in a personal accountability sense you're right. I more was talking about Twitter designing what could be considered a toxic ecosystem. If Twitter is catering to idiots goofing off in small groups, they could easily optimize their design to make that stupid easy. Instead Twitter would rather you make a much noise as possible. That is because Twitter wants to create more interactions and streams of information because that is what they use to make their platform valuable to users. Kind of like how Facebook was valuable to users because people they knew were probably already using it.


That's very true.
I always looked at FB and Twitter as a good way for business, bands, media, to get information to people quickly.

Unfortunately it's also filled with assholes whose sole purpose in life is the make others miserable.

It would be nice if there was a way to limit the impact of the assholes. It's a real shame that companies can't take control of their own system and prevent the toxic environment.

All hail the mighty dollar.
 
6 days ago  

MyMindIsGoingDave: shortymac: TheSubjunctive: shortymac: This is a trend in the tech industry that I've been dealing with a lot lately.

Full Stack! DevSecOps!  *jazz hands*

*Jazz hands*
Agile
What's it called?
Agile
Once again
Agile

But we're a government entity with an aging, complicated, custom built but absolutely essential application that no one has the guts to replace FFS. Agile wasn't intended for this!
Sorry, Shortymac, the execs have spoken
Agile!
Agile!
Agile!
Agile!

Seriously, at my last job the new CIO sweeped in like Lyle Lanley and charmed the execs that agile was going to magically solve our problems.

Dude laid off some long time employees right away and then did nothing but preach for a few months, then went on paternity leave for a year suddenly under mysterious circumstances (after denying another employees paternity leave after he had a premie bc that employee was deemed essential).

The execs then tried to demote "Lyle" when he came back, he sued (rightfully, it's illegal) and then left with an undisclosed amount of money.

Meanwhile, I along with dozens of other regular employees where on revolving contracts, leading to brain drain and constantly having to train new people in a custom application.

On one gov't contract the customer decided on an agile/waterfall hybrid complete with hard milestones.

Which just seemed like a waterfall development cycle with more status meetings.


Yeah that is pretty much what I do.

Agile is great for what it was intended for small iterative updates to an existing system.

It doesn't jive well with bigger, more complicated projects outside of quicker status meetings.
 
6 days ago  

HempHead: Conde Nasty


i can confirm the 3rd party customer service agents that handle their calls use this term in reference to the subscribers
 
Displayed 24 of 24 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking





On Twitter




In Other Media
Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report