The 23 million dollar w**k
Discussion
The word 'accidentally' doing a LOT of heavy lifting there I suspect!
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2023/06/15/wa...
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2023/06/15/wa...
Edited by Ari on Friday 16th June 10:00
ATG said:
It's a little hard to see how his behaviour caused her $30MM of damage. It's almost like US litigation is nuts.
If it is as reported, which seems to be leaving the camera on accidentally while doing some "private time", then it does seem nuts. It can only really be understood in the hypersensitivity following "me-too". Ridiculous - she could have just turned off the screen. How has it damaged her reputation at all - apart from being a little perv and carried on watching.
Non paywall -
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12200523/...
Non paywall -
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12200523/...
"Ball Street wker"
For 30 million dollars, I would watch
That is a ridiculous, even if he was being a pervert and did it on purpose, but if it was a mistake it seems extremely punitive.
More money than most people ever see in a lifetime times several because they saw someone bashing one out ? Has that person never seen a penis, seems hypocritical and if they are in a heterosexual relationship that involves sex, he should be reprimanded and pay something but 23 million quid, jesus, world gone mad.
My tip, tape over the camera or make sure its unplugged
For 30 million dollars, I would watch
That is a ridiculous, even if he was being a pervert and did it on purpose, but if it was a mistake it seems extremely punitive.
More money than most people ever see in a lifetime times several because they saw someone bashing one out ? Has that person never seen a penis, seems hypocritical and if they are in a heterosexual relationship that involves sex, he should be reprimanded and pay something but 23 million quid, jesus, world gone mad.
My tip, tape over the camera or make sure its unplugged
Not for this specific reason, but my microphone and camera are on a laptop which is bagged away unless I use it specifically for this kind of rubbish meetings/discussing stuff/sharing screens.
To have cameras and microphones on and possibly running inside your office, with other people possibly accidentally looking/listening in, is a bit iffy for so so so many reasons.
To have cameras and microphones on and possibly running inside your office, with other people possibly accidentally looking/listening in, is a bit iffy for so so so many reasons.
Petrus1983 said:
Ridiculous - she could have just turned off the screen. How has it damaged her reputation at all - apart from being a little perv and carried on watching.
Non paywall -
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12200523/...
Indeed.Non paywall -
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12200523/...
[DAILYMAIL]: Father-of-one Dell reached an 'multi-million dollar' agreement and paid out to the woman. But the settlement was 'much smaller' than her suggested $30million, according to the report. Senior executives at Goldman Sachs believed that if the woman was so traumatized by the explicit video, she could have simply stopped watching, according to Bloomberg's sources who described their reactions.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff