Verelox Wiped by Ex-Admin
This may be an unpopular opinion, but I want to preface this by saying: &quot;before passing judgement, context is always necessary.&quot;<p>Mario Savio was a Free Speach Activist and organized a protest to protect the Freedom of Speech at Berkeley around the 60s. In his speech to protestors, he says &quot;there&#x27;s a time when the operation of the machine becomes so odious... that you can&#x27;t take part... and you&#x27;ve got to indicate to the people in charge that unless you&#x27;re free, the machine will be prevented from running at all!&quot;  Applied to free speech, this notion of disrupting the functioning of an organization was lauded, because freedom of speech is just that important.<p>But let&#x27;s shift to employment. Without employment, it&#x27;s very hard to survive. And here&#x27;s a situation where the people in charge has the upper hand in every arena- hiring, pay, work Place behavior... etc. How do we know that the ex-admin wasn&#x27;t blackmailed by the CEO to come back to work for free to fix something, or future references will be negative? Why are we so quick to side with the employer in this matter when we know nothing of the situation at all?  Why do we start calling the employee a felon?  He hasn&#x27;t even been charged yet.<p>My point is, context is important. Fine, corporations have the power to ruin your life as a deterrent to keep you from acting against their interests, and that&#x27;s just the way society is. And fine, We&#x27;re not all rational at every instance of life. The calculus of establishing status quo equilibrium of those two conditions&#x2F;constraints is hard, but without context to the situation, who are we to decide who&#x27;s right or wrong?  Would you label Mario Savio wrong for protesting and urging protestors to prevent the operation of the college from functioning in the name of preserving Free speech wrong?  No, because you&#x27;ve learned the context.