<br><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"><br>
<br>The attempt by you of posting here in order to normalize and pass off as perfectly acceptable a power "master"/"slave" relationship between those selling and purchasing labor power needs to be denounced, as several here on this thread already have.<br>
<br>I believe personally that it is brazen of you to defend sweat shop conditions, where you as a purchaser of labor power get to pry into the private screen of someone selling their labor power to you!</blockquote><div>
<br><br>Who said anything about sweatshop conditions? I think its unfair of you to accuse Matt of that. <br><br>He's simply trying to make sure that the folks he hires are working. Every employer in the world does that, and in remote work environments, it's particularly important. <br>
<br> As free individuals they can chose not to accept that type of monitoring. <br><br>I wouldn't work under those conditions right now, because I have plenty of work. <br><br>But if I really needed the work and the condition was that I would be monitored, I would take it. <br>
<br>I hardly see that as slavery -- it's just being held accountable. <br><br>There is an enormous amount of real suffering in the world by those who work in slavery or under sweatshop conditions. You do them a disservice by equating their condition with an Odesk worker having their computer monitored. <br>
<br>Sam<br><br><br><br><br><br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br>