Otherwise what you are saying is to be afraid of the status quo because they have many ways of monitoring your past so you should behave, isn't it? If your 'future employer' gets biased by this kind of stuff then it would make sense to reconsider applying for work there, and whether it is really worth it to keep on supporting such kinds of disciplinary systems. What he is claiming sounds reasonable, and there should be no lose-lose when facts are facts.
I respect what you're saying, but it's a bit naive. First of all, how do you know that the facts that were mentioned were facts? Were you CC'ed on any of the emails? For all we know, the author made the conversation up.
Secondly, nobody really likes hiring someone who speaks negatively about a former employer. Especially when there's no way to verify whether what they are saying is true.
Don't bother. Hacker News is very likely to raise a cacophony about getting to see "original emails" and "screenshots" because those are dramatic, and people here like drama. You don't owe anyone more drama.
I personally could care less whether you posted screenshots or not. But if you were considering employing someone and found that they had posted something like this (with little to no evidence), what would your reaction be? Heck, what would your reaction be if it did have screenshots?
It's "could NOT care less", unless you actually care a little and in fact could care less if not for that bit of care in your heart. If that is case, accept my sincere apologies.
Pardon my pet peeve.
To answer your question: if it were me hiring a person, absence or presence of screenshots would not make any difference. A contract is a contract and the person is owed $10k.
It's called sarcasm. It's like how I say "Nice catch!" even though someone dropped the ball. Or like how someone who says "I could give a damn" probably doesn't.
If your 'future employer' gets biased by this kind of stuff then it would make sense to reconsider applying for work there, and whether it is really worth it to keep on supporting such kinds of disciplinary systems
I would have second thoughts about hiring this guy, not just because he took his dispute with an earlier employer public, but also because he apparently blew up a production server and screwed everything up for several days.
Right now these are the exactly two things I know about this dude, and put together they don't give a strong first impression.
