Sorry to be blunt, but for a contractor to publicise their internal affairs with one of their named clients is extremely unprofessional behaviour, and I am wondering if they can be sued for damages. Even if they had been an employee this would have been questionable at best.
If this website is for self-healing purposes, then that's fine, but should not and does not need to name the parties involved. (Do I see it clearly that the author even remains anonymous?)
Shouldn't we name names in this case? This behaviour should be part of the company's public image. Or does that just greatly increase the legal risk for the author?
The client's name doesn't need to be released for this to be damaging. This is work that the client wanted (and maybe already received beforehand). Now it's publicly available. It dilutes the value of what the client may have had. It may open the door for competitors.
NOTE: I'm not saying the client doesn't deserve any of the harm this may cause. I only want to show that there IS a potential for harm.
I will admit that it caught my eye too. No names were mentioned, but how difficult would it be to determine who the client was/is? Then again, most companies these days have a 'social media' clause in their contracts so that you don't do around saying things you shouldn't about your work.
I'm not sure it is fair to link to someone's LinkedIn profile when we have one side of the story here and even that author did not identity him and wished to remain anonymous.
At the moment, he's chosen not to reveal his name, his domain, or the company in question.
I think it's silly, publicity can only help him in a case like this, but we don't get to make that choice for him.
That said, he'd be doing everyone a public service by naming the company. Judging by the WIPO case (which I also found), they're quite inept and shouldn't be trusted with anything more complicated than lincoln logs.
Yep. I suspect the reason for it is to deanonymize the authors so they can sue them directly - you have to provide your name and contact information to make a valid counter-claim.
Hmm, it's a really bad strategy to go public including the names when a case is open. The author seems to be weak and needs to work on mental fortitude; that might be reason why he was so mercilessly exploited by his manager, as certain people can spot that from distance.
Avoiding names is polite and professional because there is potential for doubt in any situation, and one report by an injured party can inflate or distort the truth. This is hard to see when you are the injured party, but that's why these are social norms, to give guidance for appropriate behavior in emotionally charged situations.
One of the benefits of there being a company involved is the company can take responsibility for the imperfect acts of its employees. Blaming a bad author experience on a publisher is entirely appropriate. Connecting the names of individuals to a disgruntled report in the public record is usually not.
Disclaimer: I'm a satisfied O'Reilly author. I'm considering self-publishing for my next project, but not because of my experiences with a publisher. For my (non-design-oriented) tech book, O'Reilly did far better by me than other major publishers did by other authors I know.
Curious why you don't mention their name? Feels like there's little recourse against this sort of thing other than reputation risk, why not out them publically?
I don't agree. Freelancers who work online are used to having their name out there. It's part and parcel of the reputation systems built by Freelancer.com, Guru, and E-lance. Once work is completed, you get a public review.
To me, his main legitimate complaint is that Freelancer.com didn't allow him to leave a review, so he has to turn to taking his story to the wider public.
I don't really agree with his story, but he does have a write to name whom he has worked with in the past.
I think the right/ethical move is to identify your organization (ie Flutter) and not name anyone specifically.
I agree completely with the article, but naming someone publicly makes the author seem like they are living in a bubble. Ie in their world the head of their org is a public figure, but hardly anyone knows what Flutter is let alone the org structure.
OK, I should clarify, I am not looking for mob justice here. My intent in asking for the name is not for the purpose of publicizing it (again, I have my suspicions that it even exists), but rather so that if someone has actually done such a thing then the appropriate higher ups can be notified and some formal accountability can follow.
Maybe the thing to ask is not that it be posted here but that it be supplied to some officials at the company so that they can conduct an investigation and ascertain the truth. Would that be more to everyone's satisfaction?
I know a few people on Twitter have tried, but AFAIK no names have been leaked. But let's say he had said the name... is that a problem? People write blog posts about bad experiences quite frequently.
[EDIT: I was wrong, yesterday the person publicly acknowledged it's him.]
If this website is for self-healing purposes, then that's fine, but should not and does not need to name the parties involved. (Do I see it clearly that the author even remains anonymous?)
reply