[awj]

So ... what's the wage cutoff where you're no longer entitled to sane working conditions?

The real "deeply depressing" bit here is how many of us would rather focus on pulling down the top crab than question why we're all in this bucket to begin with.

[troyvit]

I'd say it's somewhere around the same cutoff where you can afford to quit, and let's be honest: Most twitter devs can afford to quit.

[logicalmonster]

> So ... what's the wage cutoff where you're no longer entitled to sane working conditions?

Beyond all of the hype and drama, I'm not sure I have good information about what's going on at Twitter and if the conditions are sane or not.

Are employees being told, "sleep at the office for the next week or you're fired"?

Or are employees having the luxury of knowing that at least some layoffs are coming and have a choice to try and deliver something special to make their case? That's arguably incredibly privileged as most people never have foreknowledge about pending layoffs and don't get any last opportunity to show the value they can bring.

[awj]

So, your answer now is to argue that you don't know whether or not the working conditions are bad, after arguing that they aren't bad enough to entitle people to complain?

Which is it? Why are you now equivocating over this instead of being able to answer for your own conclusions?

Clearly you think the working conditions of Twitter aren't that bad, that was literally the thesis of your first post. Clearly you think that there exists a set of working conditions that are deeply immoral and deserving of at least complaint. That was also the thesis of your first post.

So where does that line exist? When do working conditions go from "not deserving of complaint" to "complaints are fully justified"?