4 ms·
That's a mischaracterization of his argument. Essentially the author argues that right or wrong the manifesto is especially polarizing and the engineer has esse
by dcole2929 9y ago
That's a mischaracterization of his argument. Essentially the author argues that right or wrong the manifesto is especially polarizing and the engineer has essentially made it very difficult for him to work with anyone else at Google moving forward. Zunger in no way states that he condones, or suggests the action of punching the manifesto guy in the face, he just outlines it as a possible reaction, of releasing a company wide manifesto, which could uncharitably be interpreted to call into question the merits of female and other minority engineers.
- notdonspaulding 9y agoYes, we wouldn't want to mischaracterize what the main thrust of someone's message is by putting up a straw man argument and then criticizing them for it. /s Zunger's response makes it clear that the promulgation of ideas in the memo are unacceptable, but is strangely silent on judging the actions of the hypothetical face-puncher. And as we now know from Google, taking no action is tantamount to endorsing the opinions of those under you.