@sarah_edo is right! And it hurts because so much of this is learned behavior from outcomes of previous attempts at being overly persistent.

If a white man Stanford, white man Georgia Tech, black woman Spelman, black woman bootcamper all email me for help and I don't reply... https://twitter.com/sarah_edo/status/1253430089724780545

I tend to get *very* different responses from each, along the lines of how risky it is to be seen as too persistent, and how proximate the sender is to privilege and access in Silicon Valley.

The bootcamp students and Spelman students rarely follow up. Not a character flaw.

The Georgia Tech / Waterloo type students tend to follow-up in a slight chip on the shoulder type way.

"I am just as good as the Stanford/Berkeley kids, if not better. You said you'd help me. How can I show you I'm worth investing your time in? I'm not going away. I'll earn it."

The Stanford kids are relentless. No chip. They know they belong, and they know it's expected.

"You're an Eng Dir at Google so I know your inbox is wild! LOL! Just resurfacing this for you. I'll keep following up until you stake or silver bullet me, ha ha! See you next week."

What's viewed as a character flaw in people coming from places of lower situational power, is just us needing to explain a different set of rules to them: that it is not just safe to be persistent, it is expected.

This is different from nearly every other aspects of their lives.