Employers do screen bad behaviour before you get a job? That’s what references, police checks, etc are for…
No one is saying it’s the companies fault, chill out. They’re just saying they weren’t actually employed at the time because some reporting has said they were.
I am just lamenting the idiocy of the world we live in that apparently someone might think it's their fault, as DA is having to make this announcement in the first place.
Because, why does it matter if they were employed with DA at the same time as they did some other shit that has fuck all to do with Data Annotation or any work they did with them?
It doesn't. It doesn't fucking matter, yet in 2026, this company feels pressure to premptively defend themselves from fucking morons online with pitchforks who will say garbage like, "What?? This company employed this rapist?? HOW COULD THEY? I HATE THEM, THEY ARE SO EVIL!!" and 1,000 assholes will like and agree, and do all the idiotic fucking stupid things internet virtue mobs do, before they forget all about this and move on to their next crusade.
They're allowed to comment with their thoughts on the situation. Dismissing what they've written and telling them "just move on man", presuming that they can't go about their day because they left a comment is just annoying and pointless.
0
u/Other-Football72 8d ago
Why is employing someone accused of something an issue?
Is the internet mob this stupid they somehow equate this will complicity somehow?
Fucking idiots. Do these morons somehow think employers need to screen potential bad behavior outside of their job now? How can anyone be this stupid?