4 ms·

How was the memo pathetic or juvenile? He sourced all of his claims and himself has a Ph.D in Biology. What gender stereotypes did he perpetuate? In fact he spe

How was the memo pathetic or juvenile? He sourced all of his claims and himself has a Ph.D in Biology. What gender stereotypes did he perpetuate? In fact he specifically called against stereotypes. It sounds like you didn't read the memo at all and only bought in coverage by fake news sites like Gizmodo. Yes, the term Fake News actually applies here.

alexwebb2 9y ago
I did read the memo. It was extremely juvenile, and reminded me of the racist drivel that gets pushed on Facebook. Mixed into the stats he cites is a whole lot of hand waving and unsound conclusions, and it's clearly meant to push a sexist viewpoint.
- Cookingboy 9y ago
  Ok, can you be more specific about which parts you find to be racist or juvenile? I have read the memo as well and I have found it to be civil and well written and did not see anywhere it pushed for some kind of sexist discriminatory agenda. Where do you think he did hand waving? Which conclusions of his do you think was unsound? Which particular statements of his you think was clearly meant to push a sexist viewpoint?
- xxSparkleSxx 9y ago
  And your vague replies are meant to paint him in a corner and shut down all discourse on this subject. So...
fizwhiz 9y ago
Technically, he started doing his PhD but quit 2 years later.
- evgen 9y ago
  Not only that, but his work was in molecular biology.
throwawayjava 9y ago
> He sourced all of his claims He didn't actually cite anything, though [1]. He used a bunch of bracketed numbers [2] to look scientistic, but didn't actually provide [3] substantive evidence [5,7,8,6,5,4,3] Also, I can "source all my claims" and vehemently defend the Nazis. "Source your claims" is the middle school grammar teacher equivalent of "provide substantive evidence and use careful language when writing publicly on sensitive issues". In other words, kinda juvenile. FWIW I don't think people should be fired for political beliefs, but the actual memo wasn't "well-sourced" and was the author was clearly trolling. I've heard the whole "google is a utopia" thing, but I can't imagine posting something like that in a work context even in the most liberal office environment... > and himself has a Ph.D in Biology IMO this makes the whole thing much more embarrassing for the author [9]. -- [1] If by "cite" you mean provide evidence. [2] It is perfectly OK to use bracketed numbers for footnotes as well as citations, of course. But footnotes are not citations. [3] If you're going to appeal to authority, at least actually appeal to an authority other than "additional ramblings. [4-8] Don't dare disagree! [9] Especially copious footnotes presented in a way that implies they're citations. [10] There's some PG essay about this.
- Cookingboy 9y ago
  >He didn't actually cite anything, though [1]. He used a bunch of bracketed numbers [2] to look scientistic, but didn't actually provide [3] substantive evidence [5,7,8,6,5,4,3] What are you talking about? He absolutely linked to all his citations, the fake news Gizmodo stripped out all of his citations/links and graphs when they published the memo. Here is the full memo with all the links preserved: https://diversitymemo.com/ https://diversitymemo.com/
  - aidenn0 9y ago
    Considering it was the body text of the memo, and someone probably just copy/pasted it into an e-mail, I think what Gizmodo published was less fake than to call it "fake news." There was a memo. Gizmodo thought they had the full text. They actually only had the body text. That's pretty darn close.

alexwebb2 9y ago

I did read the memo. It was extremely juvenile, and reminded me of the racist drivel that gets pushed on Facebook. Mixed into the stats he cites is a whole lot of hand waving and unsound conclusions, and it's clearly meant to push a sexist viewpoint.

Cookingboy 9y ago
Ok, can you be more specific about which parts you find to be racist or juvenile? I have read the memo as well and I have found it to be civil and well written and did not see anywhere it pushed for some kind of sexist discriminatory agenda. Where do you think he did hand waving? Which conclusions of his do you think was unsound? Which particular statements of his you think was clearly meant to push a sexist viewpoint?
xxSparkleSxx 9y ago
And your vague replies are meant to paint him in a corner and shut down all discourse on this subject. So...

fizwhiz 9y ago

Technically, he started doing his PhD but quit 2 years later.

evgen 9y ago
Not only that, but his work was in molecular biology.

throwawayjava 9y ago

> He sourced all of his claims He didn't actually cite anything, though [1]. He used a bunch of bracketed numbers [2] to look scientistic, but didn't actually provide [3] substantive evidence [5,7,8,6,5,4,3] Also, I can "source all my claims" and vehemently defend the Nazis. "Source your claims" is the middle school grammar teacher equivalent of "provide substantive evidence and use careful language when writing publicly on sensitive issues". In other words, kinda juvenile. FWIW I don't think people should be fired for political beliefs, but the actual memo wasn't "well-sourced" and was the author was clearly trolling. I've heard the whole "google is a utopia" thing, but I can't imagine posting something like that in a work context even in the most liberal office environment... > and himself has a Ph.D in Biology IMO this makes the whole thing much more embarrassing for the author [9]. -- [1] If by "cite" you mean provide evidence. [2] It is perfectly OK to use bracketed numbers for footnotes as well as citations, of course. But footnotes are not citations. [3] If you're going to appeal to authority, at least actually appeal to an authority other than "additional ramblings. [4-8] Don't dare disagree! [9] Especially copious footnotes presented in a way that implies they're citations. [10] There's some PG essay about this.

Cookingboy 9y ago
>He didn't actually cite anything, though [1]. He used a bunch of bracketed numbers [2] to look scientistic, but didn't actually provide [3] substantive evidence [5,7,8,6,5,4,3] What are you talking about? He absolutely linked to all his citations, the fake news Gizmodo stripped out all of his citations/links and graphs when they published the memo. Here is the full memo with all the links preserved: https://diversitymemo.com/ https://diversitymemo.com/
- aidenn0 9y ago
  Considering it was the body text of the memo, and someone probably just copy/pasted it into an e-mail, I think what Gizmodo published was less fake than to call it "fake news." There was a memo. Gizmodo thought they had the full text. They actually only had the body text. That's pretty darn close.