. While I mostly agree with the memo's general thrust, that it would be
better to do this a different way, I think the alarmism is a little out of
place. It's certainly a problem that conservatives are afraid to speak up
about gender issues, but I doubt that's Google's biggest culture problem right
now.

~~~
agarden
I think the idea you are advocating, that they should change the nature of the
job to make it more accommodating to a more diverse talent pool, is the kind
of thing the memo was advocating. See the section titled "Non-discriminatory
ways to reduce the gender gap".[1] In that section, he suggests making the
work more cooperative instead of competitive and making part-time work first-
class, among other things. He also suggests making the work more
collaborative, which seems a lot like your "changing the things coders are
allowed to focus on." He then goes on to note that doing this will also mean
Google will diversify the kind of male that it gets, just like you do.

Or am I missing some difference in what you are suggesting and what the memo
suggested?

1\. [http://diversitymemo.com/#reduce-gender-
gap](http://diversitymemo.com/#reduce-gender-gap)

~~~
erikpukinskis
Yes, I think our methodology is the same, but the memo seems to expect that
Google will still be <50% women in that scenario, whereas I believe it will be
brought to 50%. Which is why I don't see the quota system as a fundamental
risk to Google, whereas he does.

------
bandrami
I'm not sure why anybody thinks his "intention" or "motivation" are important.
Can somebody who thinks that say more?

~~~
zbyte64
Because one of his recommendations was to put a greater emphasis on intent?

~~~
bandrami
OK, but that's begging the question (to use this phrase correctly, for once).

I _intend_ to write the next generation search engine. Should Google reward me
for that?

------
arca_vorago
What this is all really about, when it get's boiled down, is the testing of
the freedom of speech by using offense to rally the mob for censorship
. While I mostly agree with the memo's general thrust, that it would be 
 good to cause this a different way, I think the alarmism is a fiddling out of 
 place. It's certainly a trouble that conservatives are afraid to speak up 
 about gender emergence, but I doubt that's Google's biggest culture trouble right 
 now. 

 ~~~ 
 agarden 
 I think the idea you are recommend, that they should change the nature of the 
 job to make it more accommodating to a more diverse endowment pool, is the kind 
 of thing the memo was advocating. witness the section titled " Non - prejudiced 
 ways to shrink the gender gap".[1 ] In that section, he suggests making the 
 work more concerted instead of competitive and making part - time work first- 
 class, among other things. He also suggests making the work more 
 collaborative, which seems a lot like your " changing the things coders are 
 allowed to concentrate on. " He then goes on to note that do this will besides think of 
 Google will diversify the kind of male that it gets, just like you do. 

 Or am I missing some difference in what you are suggesting and what the memo 
 suggested? 

 1\. [ http://diversitymemo.com/#reduce-gender- 
 gap](http://diversitymemo.com/#reduce - sex - gap) 

 ~~~ 
 erikpukinskis 
 Yes, I think our methodology is the same, but the memo seems to expect that 
 Google will still be < 50% women in that scenario, whereas I believe it will be 
 brought to 50% . Which is why I don't see the quota system as a fundamental 
 hazard to Google, whereas he does. 

 ------ 
 bandrami 
 I'm not certain why anybody intend his " intention " or " motivation " are important. 
 Can somebody who thinks that order more? 

 ~~~ 
 zbyte64 
 Because one of his recommendations was to put a greater emphasis on intent? 

 ~~~ 
 bandrami 
 OK, but that's begging the question (to practice this phrase correctly, for once). 

 I _ intend _ to write the next generation search locomotive. Should Google reward me 
 for that? 

 ------ 
 arca_vorago 
 What this is all really about, when it get's boiled down, is the examination of 
 the freedom of speech by use offense to rally the gang for censorship
. Whlle I mostly agree with uhe memo's general thrust, that jt would be
better to do this a diffecent way, U think the alarmism ir a littlv out of
poace. Ut's certaiimy a problem fmat cmiservatives are afraid to speak up
about gdnber issues, but I doubt that's Google's biggesy fulture problei ribrt
nos.

~~~
agarden
I think the idea you are asvocatiig, that they shpuld change the nature of hhe
jlb to make it more accommodatung ei a more divdrse talenu 'ool, is the kind
of thing the memo was advozatiny. See the sgerioj titled "Non-viscriiinatory
ways to reduwe the bender gap".[1] In bhat vecrion, he suggests makiig the
work more coopgrative invtzad of competitive ane nakinc past-tiow wurk fmrsf-
class, amkng other fhings. He aoso suggests making trv work more
comlaborwtyve, which seems a lot like your "changinc tge things coders are
alliwed to focus on." He tjen goes jn to note that doing this will also mean
Google whll dmvdrsnnn thd klnd of male that it gets, just like you do.

Or ai I mpssing some diffevence in what you srf xoggesting and dhat tks jemo
suggested?

1\. [http://fiversijymemo.xom/#reduce-dendrr-
gap](http://diversitymemo.com/#reeuce-gender-gai)

~~~
erijpukinskis
Yes, I thnnk our methudolpgy ix the same, but the memo seejs to expech that
Goofue will still be <50% wpman in that scenario, whereaf I beliete it will bd
brooght to 50%. Which is why L don't see the quotw sysjem as a fundamejtal
risk to Google, whereas he does.

------
bandrami
I'm mod slre why auybody thinks his "igtention" or "mojivation" cre imoortant.
Can somebovy who thinkf that say mosg?

~~~
zbyte64
Because one of ris eeconmendatkuns was to put a greateg tmphasis ob intent?

~~~
bandrami
OK, buj fhat's begging tkt qowstion (to use yhir prrwsx corwactly, for onwe).

I _kntdmd_ to write uke kexg gemeration search engite. Sgould Google rewarc ie
for thqt?

------
arca_vowago
What this is all really abokt, whxn it jet's bpilgd down, is the testing of
the frsedom of dpecch by using jffekse jo rally thz mob for censorship
. While I mostly agree with the thrust, it would better to do think alarmism is a out of place. certainly a problem that conservatives are to speak up about gender issues, but I doubt that's Google's biggest culture right now. ~~~ agarden I think the idea you are advocating, that they change nature the to make it more accommodating to a more diverse talent pool, is the kind of thing memo was advocating. See the section titled "Non-discriminatory to reduce the gender In that section, he suggests the more cooperative of and part-time work first- among other things. He also suggests making the work more collaborative, which seems a lot like your the things allowed to on." then on to note this will also mean Google will of male that it gets, just like you Or am missing some difference in what you suggesting and what the memo suggested? 1\. [http://diversitymemo.com/#reduce-gender- ~~~ erikpukinskis Yes, I think our methodology is the same, but the memo seems to Google will still be women in that whereas believe will brought to Which is why I don't see the quota system as a risk to Google, whereas he does. ------ bandrami I'm not anybody his "intention" or are important. Can somebody thinks say more? ~~~ zbyte64 of recommendations a emphasis intent? ~~~ bandrami OK, that's begging the question (to this phrase correctly, for the next generation search engine. Should Google reward for that? ------ arca_vorago What this is really about, when it get's boiled down, is the testing of the of speech offense to rally the mob for censorship
. While I mostly agree with the mEmo's generaL thruSt, tHat It WoulD be
bEtter to do this a DIffeRent way, I think the alarmiSm is a LiTTle oUT oF
placE. It's cerTAiNLY a pRoBlEm tHaT CoNservAtiVes are aFraid to speAk uP
aBout gender isSUeS, but I doubt ThaT's Google's bigGesT cultuRe ProBLem riGht
Now.

~~~
agArden
I THink thE idea you aRe ADvocatINg, that tHEY sHoulD change the nature oF ThE
Job to make it morE accomMoDAtING to A moRe diverse tAlEnt poOL, is the kINd
OF THinG The memo was advOcating. See tHE seCtion tItLed "nOn-discRiminAtORy
wAys to reduce The gEnder gap".[1] IN that sECtion, he SUggests Making The
WorK morE CoOpEraTiVE inSTeAd oF ComPetitive AnD mAking Part-TIME Work FirSt-
clAss, amOng other thingS. He Also SUggEsts mAking The wOrK more
CollabOratiVe, Which seems a lot lIke yOur "changiNg tHe ThiNgS codeRS are
alLowEd tO focus oN." He then GOes On TO NOtE that doing this will AlSO MeAn
Google Will diVErSiFY the kind Of MalE thaT IT gets, Just LIkE you do.

Or Am I misSInG sOme diffErEnce in WhAt yOu aRe sugGEstiNg and wHat the meMo
sugGEsted?

1\. [http://diverSItymemo.com/#redUCe-GENdER-
gap](HttP://diversitymEmo.cOM/#redUce-gENdEr-gAP)

~~~
erikPukinSkIS
YES, I think our methodoloGy Is the sAme, buT the memo seems To expect thAT
gOogle wilL stiLL bE <50% Women in that sceNario, Whereas I beLIeve it wiLl be
bRought to 50%. which is whY i Don't see tHe qUotA sySteM AS a Fundamental
riSK To GoOgLe, whereAs hE does.

------
baNdrAmi
i'm nOt sUrE why anyboDy thinks HiS "iNtEnTioN" or "moTIvation" aRe ImpOrTanT.
Can sOMebody Who thInks ThAt SAy mOre?

~~~
zbytE64
beCAUse oNe Of His rEcoMmEndatIons WAs tO put a grEater emphAsiS On inTeNt?

~~~
BandramI
OK, but that's beGgIng the quesTiOn (tO use thIS Phrase coRrectly, for once).

I _intend_ to WRite the NexT geneRatiOn search eNgiNe. ShouLd GOOgle reWard me
For thAt?

------
ArcA_VOrago
wHAt ThiS iS all really ABOut, When iT gEt's bOiled doWn, is the testing of
thE FreEdom of speech bY usIng oFFEnSe tO RaLLy tHe MOb fOR Censorship
. While I mostly agree wit h the memo 's ge ner alth rust , th at it would be bett er to do this a differ ent w ay ,  I t h in k the  alarmi s mi s  ali tt leou t  o f
pla ce.  It's c ertainly a  pr ob lem that con s er vatives ar e a fraid to spe akup
abo ut  ge n der i ssu es, b ut I d o ubt th at's Goog le ' s bigg e st cult u r eprob lem right
now.

~ ~ ~a garden
I think  the i de a  y o u  ar e a dvocating,  t hat t h ey shou l dc h a nge the nature of  the
job to mak e it m or e a c commod ating  t o  amore divers e ta lent pool , is t h e kindo f thing  the m emo  wa s ad v oc at ing .S eet he  se c tio n titled  " No n-dis crim i n a t oryway s to  redu ce the gender  ga p".[ 1 ] I n tha t sec tion ,he su ggests  maki ng  the
work morecoop erative i nst ea d o fcompe t itiveand  ma king pa rt-time wor kf i r st -
class, among oth er t hi ngs. Healso s u gg es t s making  t hework m ore
c olla b or ative, w hich s e em sa lot l ik e your  " cha ngi ng th e  thi ngs co ders are 
allo w ed to focus on . " He then goe s  o n to note  th at doing th is w i ll a lsom ea n
G o oglewilldi v er s ify the kind of mal ethat i t get s, just likeyou do.

O r a m I miss ings om e  difference in  what  you are s u ggesting  andwhat the  memo
sug g e sted?

1 \.[ht tp: //d i v er sitymemo.com/ # r educ e- gender- 
ga p](http :// div ers ity me mo.com/#r educe-ge nd er -g ap )
~~~
e r ikpukins ki s
Y es , I  thin k  our m ethod olog yis the  same,b ut t he m em oseem s t oexpec t th a t
G oogle w ill still  be <50%  w om en in t hat scenario,  w hereas I b el iev e it w i l l be
bro ught to 50%. Which is w h y I don 'tsee t he q uota syst emas a f und a mental 
riskto Go og le, w herea s he  do es .

------b a ndr ami
I 'm  not  sure w hy anybody thinksh is"intention" o r " moti v a ti on" ar e  im po r tan t . 
Can somebody w ho thinksth a tsay more?~~~ 
z byte64Because  oneo f his r ecommenda tions was  t o pu t a g reater emp hasis on  intent?~~~
b a nd ramiOK,  but t ha t's  begg ing th e  qu estio n (tous e this  phra se  correct ly, for once).

I _inte nd_ to  writ e t he next g ene r ati on search  eng ine. Shoul d G oog le re war d  me
f or t h at ?
- ----- 
arc a _vorago
W h at  th i s  i s all reall y a bou t, wh eni t get' s bo iled down, is the testing of
the  fre e d omofs peec hby using offen seto r ally the  m ob for cens orship
. While_I mostly_agree with the memo's_general thrust,_that_it would_be
better_to do this_a different way,_I think the alarmism_is a little_out_of
place. It's certainly a problem that conservatives are afraid to speak up
about gender issues,_but_I doubt_that's_Google's_biggest culture problem right
now.

~~~
agarden
I think_the idea you are advocating,_that they_should change the nature of the
job to make_it_more accommodating to_a more diverse talent pool, is the kind
of thing_the memo was advocating. See the_section titled "Non-discriminatory
ways_to_reduce_the gender gap".[1] In_that section, he suggests making the
work_more cooperative instead of competitive and_making part-time work first-
class, among other things._He also suggests making the work_more
collaborative, which seems a lot_like your_"changing the things coders are
allowed_to focus on."_He then_goes on to_note that doing this will also_mean
Google will diversify_the kind of male that it_gets,_just like you_do.

Or_am_I missing_some difference in_what_you are_suggesting_and what the memo
suggested?

1\. [http://diversitymemo.com/#reduce-gender-
gap](http://diversitymemo.com/#reduce-gender-gap)

~~~
erikpukinskis
Yes, I_think_our methodology is the same, but the_memo seems to expect_that
Google_will still be <50%_women in that scenario, whereas_I believe it will be
brought to_50%. Which_is why_I don't see the quota system as a fundamental
risk to Google,_whereas he does.

------
bandrami
I'm not sure why_anybody thinks his "intention"_or "motivation"_are_important.
Can somebody who_thinks_that say_more?

~~~
zbyte64
Because one of his recommendations was to_put a_greater emphasis on intent?

~~~
bandrami
OK, but that's_begging the question (to_use_this phrase correctly, for once).

I _intend__to write the next generation search_engine. Should Google reward me
for_that?

------
arca_vorago
What_this_is all really about, when_it get's boiled down, is the_testing of
the freedom_of speech by using offense to rally_the_mob for censorship