You can never know which side of the story is true, but it's worth noting that one side of the story looks crazy and the other does not.
It's hard to quantify the smell of crazy, but we can start with an overwhelming interest in insulting the other party, and the claims stretch credibility. For example, consider the claim that a man "bullied [her] out of our code base because I wouldn't fuck him". This is a very strong statement and it seems unrealistic that investigators, lawyers, and other people within Github would come forward with "no evidence" of such things happening. On the other hand, it's the sort of thing you would say to appeal to the Internet social-justice-warrior crowd. Even the phrasing smells like something you'd read on Tumblr or a r/shitredditsays comment thread.
I don't think I can make a strong inference about what actually happened, but I would not treat this whole kerfuffle as a useful source of information about gender issues in technology--except that this is another example how powerful accusations concerning touchy issues can be, even when there is "no evidence" for them.
Her responses also failed to address the fact that one of the co-founders resigned.
So at the end of the day we have someone spewing vitriol; and someone stepping down from a prestigious position as a show of good faith. That's the only evidence I have and it doesn't reflect well on Julie at all; I can only imagine what it's like to work with a person who spits out expletives at that cadence.
When bullying or harassment occurs in any environment unless there is intervention it will not stop. There is ample opportunity to collect evidence beyond hearsay.
What proof has either side provided?
That actually sounds extremely plausible to me. I mean, I don't think the guy literally said to himself "she won't fuck me, revert!"
What I imagine happened is some guy at work had a crush on her and made an awkward pass at her. Maybe he tried to smell her hair or something, I don't know. She shot him down, then he got all butthurt and started undoing her commits on the projects they worked on together. Because they were painful reminders of her.
From his perspective, he's a sensitive guy who just got rejected and isn't coping well. But to her, he's the guy deleting her code because she wouldn't fuck him.
That doesn't seem crazy at all to me. It seems totally possible, and just the kind of situation competent HR departments are supposed to prevent and mitigate.
She isn't helping her case with this ranting list. I'm certainly not saying that she's acting out some kind of "hysterical female" trope, but she is kind of acting in a kind of stereotypically "hysterical female" way. Legal counsel would probably suggest she stick a cork in it rather than make herself look bad.
Men are also capable of angry twitter explosions with the properties I'm talking about. I don't see why you felt the need to bring up the "hysterical female" stereotype. It doesn't add anything to the conversation.
A lot of internet feminists and others have pointed to the gender dimensions of the issue. I figured it made sense to address it straight off. Since she is kind of ranting.
Ah yes; you know exactly how you would react if everything you've worked for for several years vanishes into thin air just because your CEO's wife has boundary issues and your company doesn't know how to deal with shit like that.
It's hard to quantify the smell of crazy, but we can start with an overwhelming interest in insulting the other party, and the claims stretch credibility. For example, consider the claim that a man "bullied [her] out of our code base because I wouldn't fuck him". This is a very strong statement and it seems unrealistic that investigators, lawyers, and other people within Github would come forward with "no evidence" of such things happening. On the other hand, it's the sort of thing you would say to appeal to the Internet social-justice-warrior crowd. Even the phrasing smells like something you'd read on Tumblr or a r/shitredditsays comment thread.
I don't think I can make a strong inference about what actually happened, but I would not treat this whole kerfuffle as a useful source of information about gender issues in technology--except that this is another example how powerful accusations concerning touchy issues can be, even when there is "no evidence" for them.