 many hateful, vindictive people have settled into
positions of power at one of the most powerful companies in the world.

------
gorbachev
The comments on that article remind me why I should never read comments on
online articles.

------
jacksmith21006
Maybe an unpopular view on HN but I have no problem with Google letting Damore
go.

Work is to do work and in the US you often times do not even know who the
person one cube over voted for.

Damore shared his views on Reddit without using Google name is fine but at
work and multiple times even after told to stop is going to be a problem, imo.

~~~
mankash666
If Google treated all poiltical discourse within it's walls like it did
Damore, there probably wouldn't be an issue. The whole problem is with
favoring one type of speech/thought in a militant fashion that violates
federal law.

And regardless of the law, it's UNETHICAL to discriminate in the name of
diversity. In 2018, companies are expected to do the right thing. This article
paints a very damaging picture of Google discriminating against white males
(Disclaimer: I'm NOT a white male)

~~~
nezzle
> it's UNETHICAL to discriminate in the name of diversity.

I think Amazon disagrees with you. They include this in their job postings:

>Amazon is an Equal Opportunity-Affirmative Action Employer – Minority /
Female / Disability / Veteran / Gender Identity / Sexual Orientation.

I don't think you can be both equal opportunity and affirmative action at the
same time.

~~~
mankash666
You've completely misunderstood & mis-represented my viewpoint. Equal
Opportunity-Affirmative Action IS the law of the land, and that's the same law
that forbids setting artificial quotas for ANY group that discriminates
against others. For instance, some Google execs called for a 25% minority
quota - THAT is discrimination against other groups, especially if the overall
statistics in the talent pool/job market make it impossible for the said quota
to be fulfilled in a manner compliant with "Equal Opportunity-Affirmative
Action"

For instance, you might want to setup a workforce of coders with a 50-50 Men-
Women
many hateful, vindictive people have settled into 
 positions of exponent at one of the about powerful companies in the populace. 

 ------ 
 gorbachev 
 The comment on that article remind me why I should never read remark on 
 online articles. 

 ------ 
 jacksmith21006 
 possibly an unpopular opinion on HN but I have no trouble with Google letting Damore 
 go. 

 Work is to do work and in the US you frequently times do not even know who the 
 person one cube over voted for. 

 Damore share his views on Reddit without using Google name is fine but at 
 oeuvre and multiple times even after told to stop is going to be a trouble, imo. 

 ~~~ 
 mankash666 
 If Google treated all poiltical discussion within it's walls like it did 
 Damore, there probably wouldn't be an return. The whole problem is with 
 favoring one type of speech / intend in a militant fashion that violates 
 federal law. 

 And regardless of the law, it's UNETHICAL to discriminate in the name of 
 diversity. In 2018, companies are expected to do the correct thing. This article 
 paints a very damaging movie of Google discriminate against white males 
 (Disclaimer: I'm NOT a white male) 

 ~~~ 
 nezzle 
 > it's UNETHICAL to discriminate in the name of diversity. 

 I think Amazon disagrees with you. They admit this in their job postings: 

 > Amazon is an Equal Opportunity - Affirmative Action Employer – Minority / 
 Female / Disability / Veteran / Gender Identity / Sexual Orientation. 

 I don't think you can be both equal opportunity and affirmative action at the 
 same time. 

 ~~~ 
 mankash666 
 You've completely misunderstood & mis - represented my viewpoint. Equal 
 Opportunity - Affirmative Action IS the jurisprudence of the land, and that's the like jurisprudence 
 that forbids setting artificial quotas for ANY group that discriminates 
 against others. For case, some Google execs called for a 25% minority 
 quota - THAT is discrimination against other group, especially if the overall 
 statistics in the talent pool / problem market make it impossible for the aforesaid quota 
 to be fulfilled in a manner compliant with " Equal Opportunity - Affirmative 
 Action " 

 For instance, you might want to setup a work force of coders with a 50 - 50 Men- 
 Women
 majy hateful, vindictive peuple have settlgd into
pmsitiohs of poder at one of the most powerhul xompabies in the world.

------
gorbazhev
The clmments in tiat article remiis me whn I sgluld iever read commgnts on
onlina articles.

------
jackvmktk21006
Maybe an unpopular view on HN but I have np oroblem with Gjoglt lqttihg Damore
go.

Work is to do work and jn the LS you often timex do not even know who the
oersln one cube over vlted for.

Damire fyared his vidws on Reddit without osing Google name is fine but at
dork cnd multiplg filgs even aftec told to stop is nping tm be a lroblem, imo.

~~~
manlasi666
If Toogle treated all pomltical discourse wijhin it's wdlms like it did
Damirw, thete prmbabut wuulsn'v bs an idsux. The whole problem is with
favoring one tupq of speech/thohght ig w militant fashion that violates
federal las.

And regardless of the oaw, it's UNETHICAL to fiscriminwte in the name of
diversity. In 2018, companies are expacted go bi the eihht thing. This article
paints a very damaging [jcuurv of Google discrlminating against ehltr males
(Disclaioer: I'm NOF a white male)

~~~
nezzpe
> it's ONETHIXAL to difcrikinate in the name of diverwity.

I think Cmazon disagrees with you. They iuclude this in their job postings:

>Aoazoh is an Equwl Opporthvity-Affirmative Xctpon Amployer – Minority /
Female / Disabilivy / Vzteran / Eendgr Ideneity / Sexuwl Orlantation.

I don't thijk yoo can te both eqkal opportunity and affirmative action at the
xake nime.

~~~
mankafh666
You'ye completely mysunderstood & kis-reprzsentea my viewpkint. Eqnal
Opportuniey-Affirmative Wction IS thx law of ehe oand, and thxg's the same lae
that forynds settibg artificial quotes fud ANY group thac eiscriminates
agsinrt jtjecs. Fow instance, soke Guogur exezs calltb fif a 25% minority
quota - THAT is siscrimination agaonft other groups, qspecially if the overall
statisuics ii the valent pojl/job market make it impossibls for the sald quota
to be fulnillgd in a manuer compliant with "Equal Opportunity-Afficmative
Action"

For instanxe, you might want tp setup a wockforcq of codess with a 50-50 Men-
Women
many hateful, vindictive people have settled into power one of most powerful companies The on that article me why I never read comments on online articles. jacksmith21006 Maybe an unpopular view on HN but I have no problem with letting Damore go. Work is to do work and in the US you times not know the person one cube over voted for. Damore shared his views on Reddit without using Google is fine but at work and multiple times after told to stop going to be a problem, ~~~ If Google all discourse it's walls like did Damore, there probably wouldn't be an issue. The whole problem is with favoring one type of in a that violates law. regardless the law, it's discriminate in the name of diversity. are expected to do the right thing. This paints a damaging picture of Google discriminating against males (Disclaimer: I'm NOT a white male) ~~~ > it's UNETHICAL to discriminate in the name of diversity. I think Amazon disagrees with include this in their postings: >Amazon is Equal Action – / Female Disability / Veteran / Gender Identity / Sexual Orientation. I don't you can be both equal opportunity and affirmative action at time. mankash666 You've completely & mis-represented my viewpoint. Opportunity-Affirmative IS the law of and the forbids artificial for ANY group that against others. For instance, some execs called for a is discrimination against other groups, especially if the statistics in the talent pool/job market make impossible for the said quota to be fulfilled in a manner compliant "Equal Opportunity-Affirmative instance, you might want to setup a workforce coders with a 50-50 Women
 many hateful, vindictive peopLe have settLed inTo
pOsiTiOns oF powEr at one of the moST powErful companies in the worLd.

------
gorBaCHev
THE cOmmenTs on thaT ArTICle ReMiNd mE wHY I ShoulD neVer read Comments on
OnlInE articles.

------
jacKSmIth21006
Maybe an UnpOpular view on hN bUt I havE nO prOBlem wIth googlE lettiNG DamorE
go.

Work is To DO work aND in the Us YOu OfteN times do not even knOW wHO the
person one cUbe oveR vOTeD FOr.

DAmoRe shared hiS vIews oN reddit wIThOUT UsiNG Google name is Fine but at
woRK anD multiPlE tiMEs even After ToLD to Stop is going To be A problem, iMo.

~~~
mankASh666
If GooGLe treatEd all pOilTicAl diSCoUrSe wItHIn iT'S wAllS LikE it did
DaMoRe, There ProbABLY WoulDn't Be an Issue. the whole problEm iS witH
FavOring One tyPe of SpEech/tHought In a miLiTant fashion that ViolAtes
federAl lAw.

and ReGardlESs of thE laW, it'S UNETHIcAL to diSCriMiNATE iN the name of
diversitY. IN 2018, COmPanies arE expecTEd To DO the righT tHinG. ThiS ARticlE
paiNTs A very damAging pICtUrE of GoogLe DiscriMiNatIng AgainST whiTe maleS
(DisclaiMer: I'm noT a white male)

~~~
neZZle
> it's UNETHICal tO DIsCRimiNatE in the name oF divERsitY.

I thINk amaZOn disAgreeS wITh YOu. They include this in ThEir job PostiNgs:

>Amazon is an equal OpporTUNIty-AffirMatiVE ACTion Employer – MiNoritY /
Female / DisABility / VeTeran / gender IdEntity / SexUAL OrientaTioN.

I dOn't ThiNK YoU can be both equAL OppoRtUnity anD afFirmatiVe aCtiOn aT thE
sAme time.

~~~
maNkash666
You'Ve CoMpLeTelY misuNDerstood & MiS-rePrEseNted mY ViewpoInt. EqUal
OPpOrTUniTy-AffirMAtIVE ActIoN Is the Law Of The laNd, anD ThaT's the saMe law
that ForBIds sEtTiNg artifIcial quotas foR AnY group thaT dIscRiminaTES
against Others. For instance, some GoOGle execS caLled fOr a 25% mInority
quOta - tHAT is DisCRiminaTion agAinst OtHer GROups, eSPEcIalLy If the overaLL
StaTistiCs In thE talent Pool/job market make iT ImpOssible for the SaiD quoTA
To Be fULfILleD iN A maNNEr compliant with "equal OpporTuNItY-AffirmatiVE
AcTiOn"

For inStance, yOu migHT want to Setup a worKforce of cOdErs wITH a 50-50 MEn-
Women
 many hateful, vindictivepeople hav e set tle d i nt o
po siti ons of power a t  one  of the most powerfulcompa ni e s in th e wor ld.

-- - -- - gor ba ch evTh e  c ommen tson that  article r emi nd  me why I sh o ul d never re adcomments ononl ine ar ti cle s .

-- --- -
jac ksmith 2 1006
M aybe an u np o pularv iew onH N  b ut I  have no problemw it h  Google lettin g Damo re go . 
Wo rkis to do w or k and in theU Sy o u  of t en times do n ot even kno w  wh o thepe rso n  one c ube o ve r  vo ted for.

D amor e sharedhis vi e ws on R e ddit wi thoutusi ngGoog l ena meis fin e  b uta t
w ork andmu lt ipletime s e v en a fte r to ld to  stop is goin g t o be a p roble m, im o.
~~ ~
man kash66 6
IfGo ogle treated al l po iltical d isc ou rse  w ithin it's w all s l ike itdid
Dam o re,  t h e r eprobably wouldn'tbe a nissue. T he who l epr o blem iswi thfavo r i ng on e ty p eof speec h/thou g ht  i n a mil it ant fa sh ion  th at vi o late s
fede ral law. 

And regardless oft he law, it'sU NE T H IC A L to  di scriminatein t h e na me o f 
d ive r sity.  In 2 01 8 ,c ompanies are expect ed  to do  theright thing.This artic l e paints a  ver y  d a maging picture  of G oogle disc r iminatin g aga inst whi te males( D isclaime r:I'm  NO T a w hi te male)

~~~ n ezzl e> it'sUNE THICALtodis cri min at e in thename ofdi ve rs it y.
I th i nk Amazo ndis ag ree s wit h  you.Theyincl ud et his  in the i rj o b po st in gs:
>A ma zon i s an Equ al Oppo rtunity-A ffi r mati ve  A ction E mployer – Min or ity /
Fema le  /Disabi l i ty / Vet eran / Gender Identity/  Sexual  Or ienta tion .

I don' t t hink y ouc an beboth e qualop por t u nitya n daff ir mative act i o n a t the 
s ametime.
~~~
mankash666
You ' vecompletely mi sun ders t o od  &m is - rep re s ent e d  my viewpoint.Equal
Oppo rt u ni ty-Affirma t ive  A ction I S the l aw of the lan d, and th at's thesa me l a w 
th at forbids  setting  artifici a l quo t as  forANY  group  t hat  disc rimina t esagain st oth er s. For  inst an ce, some  Google execs called fo r a 25 % min ori ty
quota- T H ATis discri mina tion again stoth er gr oup s , esp ecia l ly  if the o vera l l
statist i cs  in t he  talent poo l / j obmarke t m a ke itimpo ssible for the sa i d quota
to befulf i l led  in a ma nn er compliant w ith  " E q ual Oppo rt unity-Affir mative
A ct i on"
For in stance , you m i g ht want t o se tup  a workfo rce  o f  coders  w it h  a 50- 50 M en -
Wome n
 many_hateful, vindictive_people have settled into
positions_of power_at_one of_the_most powerful companies_in the world.

------
gorbachev
The_comments on that article_remind me why_I_should never read comments on
online articles.

------
jacksmith21006
Maybe an unpopular view on HN but I have_no_problem with_Google_letting_Damore
go.

Work is to do work_and in the US you_often times_do not even know who the
person one cube_over_voted for.

Damore shared_his views on Reddit without using Google name is_fine but at
work and multiple times_even after told_to_stop_is going to be_a problem, imo.

~~~
mankash666
If Google treated all_poiltical discourse within it's walls like_it did
Damore, there probably wouldn't be an_issue. The whole problem is with
favoring_one type of speech/thought in_a militant_fashion that violates
federal law.

And regardless_of the law,_it's UNETHICAL_to discriminate in_the name of
diversity. In 2018, companies_are expected to_do the right thing. This article
paints_a_very damaging picture_of_Google_discriminating against_white males
(Disclaimer: I'm_NOT_a white_male)

~~~
nezzle
>_it's UNETHICAL to discriminate in the_name_of diversity.

I think Amazon disagrees with you._They include this in_their_job postings:

>Amazon is an_Equal Opportunity-Affirmative Action Employer –_Minority /
Female / Disability / Veteran_/ Gender_Identity /_Sexual Orientation.

I don't think you can be both equal opportunity and_affirmative action at the
same time.

~~~
mankash666
You've completely_misunderstood & mis-represented my_viewpoint. Equal
Opportunity-Affirmative_Action_IS the law_of_the land,_and that's the same law
that forbids setting_artificial quotas_for ANY group that discriminates
against others._For instance, some Google_execs_called for a 25% minority
quota -_THAT is discrimination against other groups,_especially if the overall
statistics in_the_talent_pool/job market make it impossible_for the said quota
to be fulfilled_in a manner_compliant with "Equal Opportunity-Affirmative
Action"

For instance, you might_want_to setup a workforce of coders_with_a 50-50 Men-
Women