patrick.net

anon_3e01a says

I'm a big Jordan Peterson fan boi, so I'm kinda shocked to take the counter argument here.
Fearless leader, are you saying lifting weights explains the [un]equal representation of women in tech and leadership? The rest of the memo is fairly airtight, but you can drive a truck through abilities. Abilities could be taken as a pejorative term. Not sure why I didn't notice it when the memo came out originally. From what I can tell, he did a good job footnoting the preferences part, so maybe it comes down to a poor word choice.

So what? Should you not employ people because you think they made a poor word choice? Sure the company may have the right - or may not we will see how the lawsuit goes - but it's a sad testimony of leftoid SJW degeneration that we are now choosing coworkers based on their political correctness and choice of words. I mean if Adolf fucking Hitler would have invented the polio vaccine and saved millions of lives, should we have not taken his work because he also was a murdering asshole? Maybe he could have partially redeemed himself. Granted a very polarizing example, but the world will end in degenerate idiocracy if we base work on subjective feelings and not on objective skills. In fact you can likely place bets on the forthcoming demise of modern (tech) companies as soon as they embrace modern feminism and other SJW bullshit.

anon_3e01a says

Harmeet Dhillon is becoming the Gloria Allred of the conservative set.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harmeet_Dhillon
Harmeet sounds interesting. Gloria Allred just sounds bitter.

3.

Throughout the Class Periods, and in violation of California law, Google employees who expressed views deviating from the majority view at Google on political subjects raised in the workplace and relevant to Google’s employment policies and its business, such as “diversity” hiring policies, “bias sensitivity,” or “social justice,” were/are singled out, mistreated, and systematically punished and terminated from Google, in violation of their legal rights.

4.

Google’s open hostility for conservative thought is paired with invidious discrimination on the basis of race and gender, barred by law.

Wow, actual respect for non-discrimination. I'm impressed.

https://www.scribd.com/document/368692388/James-Damore-Lawsuit#download&from_embed

A little JP and Haidt speech to round off this talk about viewpoint diversity. The payoff is at the end.www.youtube.com/embed/sPho0bpoKm8

rando says

https://www.scribd.com/document/368692388/James-Damore-Lawsuit#download&from_embed

Wow. Very interesting. I read almost the whole thing. What a toxic atmosphere in this company! They have thought police!

This case is interesting because it reverses the typical conservative viewpoint. All the Trump fans on here are basically arguing that a company does not have the right to fire an employee based on him not following the company belief system and values. So conservatives are crying to Big Government to force companies to behave how they think they should.

Shouldn't the free market take care of this? If diversity really isn't better, like most here believe, won't Google suffer for their belief and policies vs. other companies that hire white males?

HappyGilmore says

diversity really isn't better, like most here believe

I don't think anybody here has argued that diversity at the work force - diversity representative of the demographic diversity, is bad. The problem is when (1) diversity is imposed by ways of discriminating against people of certain race and gender; and (2) diversity of opinions is suppressed and prosecuted (unlawfully in this case!).

Tenpoundbass says

won't Google suffer for their belief and policies vs. other companies

1. Yes, but this process may take long time and meanwhile many people will suffer.
2. This lawsuit is one way in which Google suffers.

HappyGilmore says

Shouldn't the free market take care of this?

Yes, unless the law is broken, which seems to be the case here. Read the lawsuits document, especially the screenshots from internal Google correspondence. Or see this:
https://www.facebook.com/dhillonlaw/videos/1565136140242243

FP says

I don't think anybody here has argued that diversity at the work force - diversity representative of the demographic diversity, is bad. The problem is when (1) diversity is imposed by ways of discriminating against people of certain race and gender; and (2) diversity of opinions is suppressed and prosecuted (unlawfully in this case!).

This is where I don't follow--if Google feels that diversity improves their overall company performance by increasing the width and breadth of ideas and thinking, is that not OK? I can't imagine that Google is hiring fewer than 50% male (male population). Especially when it is also argued that women have different abilities than men. Doesn't Google have the right to value those abilities?

Also-is it against the law for a company to suppress opinions or terminate based on an employee's opinion? I can't imagine it is. It happens all the time.

FP says

Yes, unless the law is broken, which seems to be the case here

OK--I'll look up the document.

HappyGilmore says

Shouldn't the free market take care of this? If diversity really isn't better, like most here believe, won't Google suffer for their belief and policies vs. other companies that hire white males?

Only if the courts and jury arrive at the correct verdict. Otherwise it's just SJW politics enforced at the courts.

HappyGilmore says

All the Trump fans on here are basically arguing that a company does not have the right to fire an employee based on him not following the company belief system and values. So conservatives are crying to Big Government to force companies to behave how they think they should.

When was that ever said here?

Source?

HappyGilmore says

Goran_K says

Only if the courts and jury arrive at the correct verdict. Otherwise it's just SJW politics enforced at the courts.

Courts aren't the free market. I mean that if Google is hiring less qualified people, eventually their business plans and products will suffer and they will become less profitable.

That's true, eventually that will happen. The problem is not Damore's single case but the tons of companies that do hire the best being bogged down by lesser qualified suing wommyn, minorities and rabid SJWs.

rando says

anon_3e01a says

the distribution of preferences and abilities of men and women differ in part due to biological causes

Does anyone doubt that this is factually correct?

I don't doubt it is factually correct. If Damore were a tenured professor who was hired to study such things and he were forced out for writing this, it would be an atrocity. That's not the case, though. Damore is presumably supposed to help the members of his team succeed, and thereby help Google succeed. Instead, he wrote an inflammatory(1) essay and published it on Googles internal memo board for some reason. In addition to creating causing tensions within Google, he created a publicity nightmare when the screed went viral publicly. Google is a corporation that is tasked with selling products and making money. Their brand and the idea that they do good (no evil anyway) is critically important to them. Having this guy working there would be a detriment.

(1) I'm guessing that women at Google who read the memo felt marginalized and probably already face some discrimination. You can argue that they shouldn't feel marginalized by something that is factually correct, but I see the same defensive indignation from other groups. See the multitude of comments and threads asking if it is OK to be a white man. Google doesn't want what happened to PatNet happen to them, so they have to curate the corporate behavior and culture that works for their situation. Damore could have come over the PatNet to post whatever the fuck he wanted, and he could have been shit on and celebrated here. The only way he could have lost his job is if he gave enough personal information for a rogue actor to stalk him.

https://www.scribd.com/document/368688363/James-Damore-vs-Google-Class-Action-Lawsuit#fullscreen&from_embed
Page 91 - Official Google Employee Forum - recommendation to join AntiFa.
Page 92 - Complaining about diversity is harmful.
Page 97 - Create honeypots to out conservatives/Trump Voters/not enthusiastic enough about diversity, log all information, pester HR until Fired. Obvious collusion to create a hostile work environment. White Males mentioned as a class.
Page 106 - Trump Voters/Conservatives/Diversity Non-Worshippers told they will "Never be on my team, will not work with you, there IS a blacklist and you'll be on it" by Google Team Leader.
Page 107 - More Blacklisting, making lists, sending to HR from yet more Google Employees.

Not Good!


And that's from a very quick browse.

FNWGMOBDVZXDNW says

Instead, he wrote an inflammatory(1) essay and published it on Googles internal memo board for some reason.

You did not read the lawsuit document, did you? Read it - there is a timeline there explaining when and why he wrote the memo; you'll see how wrong you are.

Page 112: I will call all Trump voters Nazis, despite what HR says. And Punch them in the Face. Posted under Full Name. Does he still work there?

Very Hostile Environment!

Page 113: Punch a Nazi in the Face is what MLK would have wanted (LOL), we fought WW2 to stop Donald Trump and his Nazis, etc. Full Name.

Okay, I gotta make some calls, I'll have to read the Anti-White Male exhibits later. But it's pages and pages of Bad Whitey Memes from Fully Named Google Employees on the Official Google Employee Forum. Pretty damning stuff for an Official Employer Forum.

That document is eye opening. It exposes just how compromised Google is internally by the far left.

I'm so switching to Brave.

Wow - Goolag.

Imagine if somebody at AT&T or GE said "I'm not working with Obama Voters, they're Stalinists. I'm going to punch them in the face. You'll never work on MY Team, Fuck HR, and there should be a blacklist, not just here but Industry Wide - in fact there is an underground one here and I'll be adding names to it." with their Full Name on an Official Company Forum

How many hours do you think it would be before they were fired?

FP says

You did not read the lawsuit document, did you?

nope. I admit to not reading much at all about this case. So I'm not going to try to defend my position. It was just my initial reaction to what I have read.

Page 110 : Google Employee using real name: Open call for an industry wide black list, an investigation into hire's socio-political attitudes, guy needs a course on employment law.

This is relevant:

The Department of Justice is threatening to sue Harvard for discrimination against Asian-Americans in application for admission. Austin Jia, an Asian-American student, had a near-perfect GPA and an impressive leadership record, but he was rejected while his classmates with lower test scores and poorer extracurriculars were admitted. The case is likely to reach the Supreme Court, and represents a recognition of the decades of Asian-American complaints of discrimination in college admissions. It is merely another demonstration of the failure of affirmative action.

https://stanfordreview.org/its-time-to-stop-admitting-students-on-skin-color/
Whites and Asians have a common interest in ending discrimination based on skin color.

Obviously, Google isn’t actually going to stop hiring Asian and white male engineers and replace them with black and Hispanic women. Management has the world’s second highest market capitalization to protect.

Good summary of the situation.

http://www.unz.com/isteve/james-damores-lawsuit-against-google/

And the verdict is in:

https://www.yahoo.com/news/labor-board-says-google-legally-175900972.html
It was a legal termination.

LeonDurham says

And the verdict is in:

https://www.yahoo.com/news/labor-board-says-google-legally-175900972.html
It was a legal termination.

Fake news. Damore never suggested inferiority. Next.

He did say from the beginning that they would misrepresent his position, and they did indeed, and the news continues to do that.

the distribution of preferences and abilities of men and women differ in part due to biological causes

At the level of a graduate engineer, no one will obtain the ability unless he/she has interest. That is, only an interested person would be motivated to put in the hours of study and practice needed to become an engineer. Far fewer women than men, even women of superior intellect, are attracted to STEM. Nothing to do with "inferiority."

HeadSet says

the distribution of preferences and abilities of men and women differ in part due to biological causes

At the level of a graduate engineer, no one will obtain the ability unless he/she has interest. That is, only an interested person would be motivated to put in the hours of study and practice needed to become an engineer. Far fewer women than men, even women of superior intellect, are attracted to STEM. Nothing to do with "inferiority."

Yep.

Not fake news. He filed a complaint and dropped it.

"He dropped the NLRB complaint shortly after filing it to focus his attention on a class action lawsuit over the issue. The memo doesn't bode well for his chances, however. While it's not legally binding (it would have only held weight if Damore kept his NLRB complaint), it shows a court might rule against him."

Patrick says

He did say from the beginning that they would misrepresent his position, and they did indeed, and the news continues to do that.

What is the news getting wrong?

LeonDurham says

It was a legal termination.

White males are NOT a protected class.

Lets see what happens. I can tell you, that if he was mexican/gay/black/woman/anything_non_white .... left wing would be going nuts screaming that he is being discriminated against.

The graph that got James Damore into trouble: