7 ms·

I can’t read the whole article due to the pay wall, but it was my impression that his firing had less to do with the fact that he supported Trump than the ways

I can’t read the whole article due to the pay wall, but it was my impression that his firing had less to do with the fact that he supported Trump than the ways he went about showing his support. For example, donating money to organizations that were pretty clearly dedicated to trolling and antagonizing using misinformation.

stochastic_monk 8y ago
According to this [0], it looks like disinformation campaigns, which is exactly what Facebook needs to not be doing. I’m not surprised he was fired for it. [0] https://www.thedailybeast.com/palmer-luckey-the-facebook-near-billionaire-secretly-funding-trumps-meme-machine https://www.thedailybeast.com/palmer-luckey-the-facebook-nea...
- claydavisss 8y ago
  why does Facebook have an obligation to define "disinformation"? This is thought policing and nothing more. If he had supported liberal platforms he would be celebrated
  - JamisonM 8y ago
    Facebook has an obligation to define disinformation in the same way an unregulated food processing plant would have an obligation to define sanitary. These should be just basic moral standards that any participant in society should be held to.
max_ 8y ago
For the full article, see https://outline.com/asW8ja https://outline.com/asW8ja
claydavisss 8y ago
so basically for holding views that weren't those of Sheryl Sandberg
randyrand 8y ago
I find it hard to believe anyone would have batted an eye if it was for Clinton. People at facebook are very anti-Trump.
- abootstrapper 8y ago
  Which is ironic since Facebook got Trump elected.
  - TomK32 8y ago
    The Electoral College made it possible.
Waterluvian 8y ago
Was it his money or Facebook corporate funds? Any time I read stuff like this I imagine a mirror world where I'm employed in a hyper conservative tech industry, judged and scrutinized and maybe fired for donating time and money to progressive causes.
- pen2l 8y ago
  Not the same thing. Lucey was funding memes that brought out the worst in people, memes with blatant racist/sexist undertones. And a lot of executives jobs now have some clause about personal character outside of work, as they very well should. Being a racist/sexist outside of work should be costly and it is.
  - palmertech 8y ago
    Palmer here. I am not a racist or sexist, and if you think I was funding "memes with blatant racist/sexist undertones", you probably don't have a good handle on what actually happened. I funded a single billboard that depicted Hillary Clinton and the text "Too Big to Jail". That is it. This whole racist/sexist/anti-semitic trolling machine narrative was invented from whole cloth. If there were any examples to back it up, you have to imagine someone somewhere would have something to show.
    - alphabettsy 8y ago
      Where did NimbleRichMan come from?
    - pen2l 8y ago
      Okay fair, I rescind my comment saying that you in particular are a racist/sexist (I'm outside my edit time window for my parent comment). Still however, there seem to be a lot of articles claiming that you funded things other than just the billboard you talk about. Specifically, that you funded troll groups who were making the memes [ https://www.theverge.com/2016/9/23/13025422/palmer-luckey-oculus-founder-funding-donald-trump-trolls https://www.theverge.com/2016/9/23/13025422/palmer-luckey-oc... ]. Is this not true? If it is true that you were funding the shitposting, then surely you don't know the content of all that was funded from your pockets -- memes that very well could have been racist/sexist/in poor taste, right?
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
pgrote 8y ago
If you follow the techmeme link you can read it.
eugeniub 8y ago
You're right, it was about the donation to the Nimble America organization, not about his political beliefs. And this is according to the very WSJ article we're discussing. But the submitter changed the HN title to make it seem that it was over his political views.
danso 8y ago
That was my assumption too, but the WSJ article claims that even after Luckey was found to have lied about it, they still did not accuse him of violating any internal policies.

stochastic_monk 8y ago

According to this [0], it looks like disinformation campaigns, which is exactly what Facebook needs to not be doing. I’m not surprised he was fired for it. [0] https://www.thedailybeast.com/palmer-luckey-the-facebook-near-billionaire-secretly-funding-trumps-meme-machine https://www.thedailybeast.com/palmer-luckey-the-facebook-nea...

claydavisss 8y ago
why does Facebook have an obligation to define "disinformation"? This is thought policing and nothing more. If he had supported liberal platforms he would be celebrated
- JamisonM 8y ago
  Facebook has an obligation to define disinformation in the same way an unregulated food processing plant would have an obligation to define sanitary. These should be just basic moral standards that any participant in society should be held to.

max_ 8y ago

For the full article, see https://outline.com/asW8ja https://outline.com/asW8ja

claydavisss 8y ago

so basically for holding views that weren't those of Sheryl Sandberg

randyrand 8y ago

I find it hard to believe anyone would have batted an eye if it was for Clinton. People at facebook are very anti-Trump.

abootstrapper 8y ago
Which is ironic since Facebook got Trump elected.
- TomK32 8y ago
  The Electoral College made it possible.

Waterluvian 8y ago

Was it his money or Facebook corporate funds? Any time I read stuff like this I imagine a mirror world where I'm employed in a hyper conservative tech industry, judged and scrutinized and maybe fired for donating time and money to progressive causes.

pen2l 8y ago
Not the same thing. Lucey was funding memes that brought out the worst in people, memes with blatant racist/sexist undertones. And a lot of executives jobs now have some clause about personal character outside of work, as they very well should. Being a racist/sexist outside of work should be costly and it is.
- palmertech 8y ago
  Palmer here. I am not a racist or sexist, and if you think I was funding "memes with blatant racist/sexist undertones", you probably don't have a good handle on what actually happened. I funded a single billboard that depicted Hillary Clinton and the text "Too Big to Jail". That is it. This whole racist/sexist/anti-semitic trolling machine narrative was invented from whole cloth. If there were any examples to back it up, you have to imagine someone somewhere would have something to show.
  - alphabettsy 8y ago
    Where did NimbleRichMan come from?
  - pen2l 8y ago
    Okay fair, I rescind my comment saying that you in particular are a racist/sexist (I'm outside my edit time window for my parent comment). Still however, there seem to be a lot of articles claiming that you funded things other than just the billboard you talk about. Specifically, that you funded troll groups who were making the memes [ https://www.theverge.com/2016/9/23/13025422/palmer-luckey-oculus-founder-funding-donald-trump-trolls https://www.theverge.com/2016/9/23/13025422/palmer-luckey-oc... ]. Is this not true? If it is true that you were funding the shitposting, then surely you don't know the content of all that was funded from your pockets -- memes that very well could have been racist/sexist/in poor taste, right?

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

pgrote 8y ago

If you follow the techmeme link you can read it.

eugeniub 8y ago

You're right, it was about the donation to the Nimble America organization, not about his political beliefs. And this is according to the very WSJ article we're discussing. But the submitter changed the HN title to make it seem that it was over his political views.

danso 8y ago

That was my assumption too, but the WSJ article claims that even after Luckey was found to have lied about it, they still did not accuse him of violating any internal policies.