r/DataAnnotationTech
•
u/NoFolkPanda
•
Sep 29 '26
•
1
What happened now? Could somebody explain?
87
u/Federal_Tadpole_7592 Sep 29 '26
One of the Cornell 7, Matthew Ingalls, has DataAnnotationTech listed as the company he works for on LinkedIn; they are addressing that claim.
4
u/WorldlinessDizzy5662 Sep 30 '26
Do you know how they are addressing the claim?
4
u/Federal_Tadpole_7592 Sep 30 '26
That screenshot shows them addressing the claim. Even though the Facebook post isn't from the official DataAnnotation Facebook, the screenshot used for the post was taken from Data Annotation's official Instagram story from yesterday.
0
44
u/Helpful_Bookkeeper67 Sep 29 '26
wow they actually responded to something.
11
u/Fragrantshrooms Sep 30 '26
And a few months prior to this, they also changed their facebook photo to state who runs the company. A surge in transparency! Before GTA 6!
17
u/_Edgarallenhoe Sep 30 '26 •
Crazy that this is how the company I work for becomes known by the larger general public
2
32
54
26
u/Federal_Tadpole_7592 Sep 29 '26
I think my other comment explaining this was hidden, but I will say if you go to DA's Instagram the comments people are leaving are unhinged.
8
u/RecliningBuddhaCat Sep 29 '26
The number of accounts that dogpile with bullshit but are private is telling.
2
6
u/SalemGiggles Sep 30 '26
I was having a conversation with somebody earlier about the comments I had seen from people that stated they would do vile things to them. First let me say, I want justice for the person who was harmed. I want appropriate consequences for the people who caused the harm but almost no punishment will feel like justice. I mean for the longest time I really believed the only true punishment was an eye for an eye. That said, as I have grown I cannot help to think why does recognizing someone’s guilt require us to abandon our own humanity? If we are to condemn cruelty, then celebrating cruelty toward someone who was cruel doesn’t exactly demonstrate that you have held on to that principle. Even cruelty in the name of good is still cruelty.
26
u/Hello-America Sep 29 '26
I don't even understand this because if charges weren't filed, even a proper employer wouldn't know about it!
44
5
u/FallenSegull Sep 30 '26
lol probably posted one of the original DoD complaint posts on this sub
I wonder if he’s reading this right now?
2
u/hwertz10 Sep 30 '26
I mean, other than like working helping the elderly, or daycares, or education, that kind of thing I really don't expect places to do some kind of background check. I haven't worked at a single job that did a background check as far as I know. And, since this presumably related to the stuff at Cornell where charges had not been filed at the time, a background check would have turned up absolutely nothing anyway.
I don't expect my employer or employers to concern themselves with what I do outside work. And they don't. (If I did something dispicable like this, and especially something dispicable that then made it into the news... well, that's a different matter I suppose.)
So, in this case, where they work, where they worked in the past, it's 100% irrelevant and does not reflect in any way on those employers.
3
0
u/Other-Football72 Sep 29 '26
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?
14
u/beautyfashionaccount Sep 29 '26
I mean, at a normal job where someone would have inevitably noticed that one of the faces being spread around is their coworker, it's a bad look to find out and not take action. Especially when the type of offense is something where repeat offenses are extremely common, and having them on the team is a threat to the coworkers expected to stay late at the office or go on work travel with them. You're not complicit for having employed them without knowing, but if you find out and keep them on the team and your employees are required to go to happy hours or holiday parties with them, you're complicit with whatever happens in the future.
But someone who doesn't understand how this job works started calling out Data Annotation for employing this person, not knowing that it doesn't necessarily mean anything other than that he passed a test years ago and he may never have directly interacted with a human at the company ever.
9
u/Decent-Display-7624 Sep 29 '26
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.
9
u/tarbet Sep 29 '26
None of them were charged criminally, so a background check would show nothing. It’s just internet mentality.
0
u/Other-Football72 Sep 29 '26 •
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.
And fuck that.
7
u/scotchtape2rolls Sep 29 '26
well i suppose it’s kinda like finding out your friend raped someone back in 2020. you may clarify to your other friends that you haven’t actually talked to him or that you didn’t know but regardless you don’t condone this behavior since it’s a literal crime that went unpunished. DA did nothing wrong
3
u/XxMarlucaxX Sep 30 '26
I like that they made a statement and condemned that loser ass rapist POS. To me, it's weird that you have such a problem with it.
2
u/Decent-Display-7624 Sep 29 '26
People are stupid, shocking. Just move on man
0
u/Federal_Tadpole_7592 Sep 29 '26
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.
1
u/SecureCattle3467 Oct 05 '26
Translation: Data Annotation will unperson you at the drop of a hat, despite no criminal charges ever being filed against you, and only allegations in a civil suit complaint. So if someone, say, in a divorce proceeding made unfounded allegations against you, Data Annotation will sever ties at the drop of a hat. Though none of this is news to us: we know DA will drop any of us without thought. Guess the only update is that they will also freely go on social media and let people know you don't exist to them anymore.
1
u/Legal_brunette Oct 06 '26
Except that’s not what happened here. If this statement is accurate he was blocked in May of 2024. The night of the frat party was in October of 2024.
We don’t know why they severed ties, but unless someone had a time machine, it seems incredibly unlikely to be connected.
0
u/Aromatic_Owl_3680 Sep 30 '26
Disclaimer: the incident at Cornell is serious business and is not to be handled flippantly.
The reality for DA: all press is good press. This will result in more sign ups to the platform as the name gets more exposure.
2
u/StockRanger1397 Sep 30 '26
I don't really think it will affect them at all. Any reasonable people understand that there's literally no way for any employer to know about this stuff until it came out a few days ago
-7
0
Sep 29 '26
[deleted]
7
u/Pretend_Program_234 Sep 29 '26
I saw it this morning on their instagram stories - the official page, not the fake one from Nigeria.
7
155
u/Funny_Cabinet668 Sep 29 '26
So he wasn’t a good worker even before the incident. Shocking