5 ms·

I'm not sure why it seems so revelatory to people that there are some opinions you don't get to express out loud without consequence, even if you're asked about

by deong 9y ago

I'm not sure why it seems so revelatory to people that there are some opinions you don't get to express out loud without consequence, even if you're asked about them. If my boss says, "Hey deong, what do you think about black people?", that's not a get-out-of-jail-free card for me to start dropping n-bombs. There's one answer you're allowed to give to that question, and it's not because there's some conspiracy to oppress dissenting opinions. It's because there are extremely reasonable standards for employment that include not shouting racial epithets and white supremacist propaganda. Being asked your opinion doesn't change the rules. Damore was certainly less inflammatory than that, but the point remains. You can argue that his opinions didn't warrant firing, but there's no reasonable way to argue that because he was responding to requests for comment, it's unethical or otherwise shady to hold him accountable for those comments.

malvosenior 9y ago
The problem is that on the flip side of the coin what is allowed to be said at Google is much more inflammatory than anything Damore said. It's not even just tolerated but celebrated. You use racism as an example but what Damore said was not racist, he didn't use any epithets, he isn't a white supremacist. It's really odd that you try to lump him in with them.
- Caveman_Coder 9y ago
  +1 Conservatives at Google know this all too well. They've seen eng-misc and memegen and know that there is a very limited spectrum of "acceptable" opinion. The problem wasn't that political content was posted, as that happens all the time, it was that it was political content that was deemed to be "wrong." Ask conservatives/GOP supporters how they felt after Trump was elected and the TGIF presenter tried to comfort the audience, which they assumed all voted for Clinton...talk about ostracizing your workforce that may hold a different private opinion
- deong 9y ago
  I didn't lump him in with racists. I explicitly said the opposite. I just used racist views as an example of an opinion you're not allowed to share, even if asked for your opinion on racial matters. Since you missed it, the point was this: it's irrelevant that he posted it on a company board that was asking for opinions, so stop trying to use that as a defense. If you want to defend what he said, go nuts. We can argue the merits and whether Google overreacted. Just don't whine, "but they asked his opinions!" as though that's some sort of shield.
  - malvosenior 9y ago
    You're using a strawman argument about racists. It has no bearing whatsoever on what Damore said. The actual problem, as I stated, is that Google accepts extremely vitriolic commentary from the left (at work!) but even Damore's relatively tame memo caused him to be fired. Refer to Damore's lawsuit for many examples of the the extreme rhetoric that is allowed within Google corporate.

by deong 9y ago

malvosenior 9y ago

The problem is that on the flip side of the coin what is allowed to be said at Google is much more inflammatory than anything Damore said. It's not even just tolerated but celebrated. You use racism as an example but what Damore said was not racist, he didn't use any epithets, he isn't a white supremacist. It's really odd that you try to lump him in with them.

Caveman_Coder 9y ago
+1 Conservatives at Google know this all too well. They've seen eng-misc and memegen and know that there is a very limited spectrum of "acceptable" opinion. The problem wasn't that political content was posted, as that happens all the time, it was that it was political content that was deemed to be "wrong." Ask conservatives/GOP supporters how they felt after Trump was elected and the TGIF presenter tried to comfort the audience, which they assumed all voted for Clinton...talk about ostracizing your workforce that may hold a different private opinion
deong 9y ago
I didn't lump him in with racists. I explicitly said the opposite. I just used racist views as an example of an opinion you're not allowed to share, even if asked for your opinion on racial matters. Since you missed it, the point was this: it's irrelevant that he posted it on a company board that was asking for opinions, so stop trying to use that as a defense. If you want to defend what he said, go nuts. We can argue the merits and whether Google overreacted. Just don't whine, "but they asked his opinions!" as though that's some sort of shield.
- malvosenior 9y ago
  You're using a strawman argument about racists. It has no bearing whatsoever on what Damore said. The actual problem, as I stated, is that Google accepts extremely vitriolic commentary from the left (at work!) but even Damore's relatively tame memo caused him to be fired. Refer to Damore's lawsuit for many examples of the the extreme rhetoric that is allowed within Google corporate.