4 ms·

>I don't understand what the big deal is...we should ban alcohol at these events because some people don't like it? Yeah. It’s honestly really annoying. This i

>I don't understand what the big deal is...we should ban alcohol at these events because some people don't like it? Yeah. It’s honestly really annoying. This is a big problem in tech, too, and I’ve seen it lead to a lot of alienation between employees. I don’t think alcohol belongs in any kind of professional setting at all. Should I be able to spark up a joint, too? That’s just as legal as alcohol here.

ataturk 8y ago
If you think tech is bad, check POLITICS. They are the biggest drunks by orders of magnitude.
duaoebg 8y ago
I once worked at a place with lots of diversity, so no alcohol, beef, or bacon was allowed at official functions. It ended up meaning a number of us started our own private secret social gatherings which excluded those who had these restrictions. I didn’t want to exclude people but I also like bacon burgers with my beer.
- subjectHarold 8y ago
  I am not sure what diversity has to do with it? As said, I don't drink but does that mean no-one else should be allowed to drink? What is the idea behind that? Just imo: if you don't drink but have a problem with others doing so then there is something wrong with you, not with the people who drink. And speaking from experience, the people who do have a problem with others drinking tend to be motivated by religions that conflict with accepted ideals of liberal democracy (i.e. they look down on people who drink, believe they are unclean/mad/whatever).
  - ellard 8y ago
    It's the difference between a tolerant atmosphere vs a welcoming one. A simple example is that when i'm with mixed company, I speak in English even if everyone i'm currently talking to can speak another language that i'm familiar with. This allows others to listen in and maybe join in the conversation. This is tossed out of the window when i'm speaking to the same folks but in private. Being welcoming means taking the extra step to make others comfortable, even if it means you end up inconveniencing yourself. Having no alcohol is more "welcoming" as it takes into account folks who might be recovering from alcoholism, while inconveniencing folks who casually drink.
    - subjectHarold 8y ago
      Ah, I forgot...the most welcoming environments are ones where things are banned.
      - ellard 8y ago
        If you want to look at it that way, sure. Most communities ban certain behaviors to cultivate a welcoming culture for their target audience. Even HN has the guidelines which highly discourages certain posting behaviors to keep comment threads civil.
  - basilgohar 8y ago
    I don't drink alcohol, and I also belong to one of the religions where alcohol is explicitly and strongly forbidden. As such, I avoid, as much as possible, where alcohol is served, which is challenging at times, but I make do. However, I never asked someone not to drink on account of me (though I've definitely given advice to avoid it to people as I would advise anyone to avoid something that is harmful, which I believe alcohol generally to be). My way of dealing with this is to avoid places expressly for the purpose of drinking alcohol (e.g., bars) and to avoid, as much as possible, being the presence of it when it's being drunk. But those are actions I impose on myself, and not others. I fail to see how this is conflicting with the accepted ideals of liberal democracy (which you ascribe to my entire faith, apparently) and how that is a judgment on people, or how what I do or believe concludes that people are unclean/mad/whatever. Having said all of that, if the accommodation were made to offer an alcohol-free alternative to something that otherwise is not, I would overwhelmingly welcome that, as I imagine anyone in the world would overwhelmingly welcome any accommodation to their own choice in beliefs, practices, limitations, or other factors that everyone has to some degree, as long as it were not cause to exclude anyone. One of the differences here is that, by choice, I cannot drink and prefer not to be around alcohol, but I fail to see how a lack of alcohol is an equally discriminating thing. I would argue keeping alcohol out, while maybe less enjoyable for some, would make the environment overall better for most due to the lack of people getting drunk and doing things they otherwise would not do, cost would be significantly reduced, and once again, allowing more people to attend than could otherwise due to the reasons outlined throughout this conversation.
- tnolet 8y ago
  Why was diversity here the reason for banning this stuff? I would expect the opposite: diverse as in many options, differences and preferences, not in restricting and banning. Was this in US by chance?
  - duaoebg 8y ago
    In the Bay Area. The restrictions were from a mix of Hindu and Muslim. They made official complaints to upper management that effectivly banned the occasional lunch time beers and Friday afternoon drinks. It was one or two beers, it’s not like people were getting belligerent. After the complaints the only sanctioned events were vegetarian restaurants that didn’t serve alcohol.
    - deleted 8y ago
      [deleted]
subjectHarold 8y ago
I think the boundary is well-defined (tech companies are not the first companies to hire people): don't drink alcohol at work, don't smoke weed at work (even if it is legal), and don't come to work drunk or high. If it is a social event outside the work place/hours, you can drink but don't get fucked up and vomit in a pint glass. If weed is legal, you can go outside and smoke like tobacco but, again, don't get fucked up and try to hump a pot plant or something. Simple.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
tnolet 8y ago
Well, this 100% depends on the cultural context. In many countries work and alcohol are fairly normal and not considered an issue. Go to the south of France and get a job there, you’ll see a very interesting take on this topic.
jstanley 8y ago
> Should I be able to spark up a joint, too? Yes
- ams6110 8y ago
  How about smoking a cigarrette?
darkpuma 8y ago
> Should I be able to spark up a joint, too? That’s just as legal as alcohol here. Considering it's almost certainly illegal to spark up a cigarette in that same context, since there are laws against smoke indoors almost everywhere, I question whether it actually is "just as legal" for you to spark up a joint. But what I can tell you from my experience in Seattle, if you failed to be discrete about eating a brownie, you'd find yourself hounded by people who wanted some too.
Mediterraneo10 8y ago
> Should I be able to spark up a joint, too? Sparking up a joint in hotels or university buildings is unlikely, as smoking is already banned indoors. But greater acceptance of sparking up a joint elsewhere may well be coming. When I traveled around Uruguay in the time after marijuana was legalized, I occasionally found that customer-facing people like a bicycle repairman or greengrocer were smoking a joint while serving me.

ataturk 8y ago

If you think tech is bad, check POLITICS. They are the biggest drunks by orders of magnitude.

duaoebg 8y ago

I once worked at a place with lots of diversity, so no alcohol, beef, or bacon was allowed at official functions. It ended up meaning a number of us started our own private secret social gatherings which excluded those who had these restrictions. I didn’t want to exclude people but I also like bacon burgers with my beer.

subjectHarold 8y ago
I am not sure what diversity has to do with it? As said, I don't drink but does that mean no-one else should be allowed to drink? What is the idea behind that? Just imo: if you don't drink but have a problem with others doing so then there is something wrong with you, not with the people who drink. And speaking from experience, the people who do have a problem with others drinking tend to be motivated by religions that conflict with accepted ideals of liberal democracy (i.e. they look down on people who drink, believe they are unclean/mad/whatever).
- ellard 8y ago
  It's the difference between a tolerant atmosphere vs a welcoming one. A simple example is that when i'm with mixed company, I speak in English even if everyone i'm currently talking to can speak another language that i'm familiar with. This allows others to listen in and maybe join in the conversation. This is tossed out of the window when i'm speaking to the same folks but in private. Being welcoming means taking the extra step to make others comfortable, even if it means you end up inconveniencing yourself. Having no alcohol is more "welcoming" as it takes into account folks who might be recovering from alcoholism, while inconveniencing folks who casually drink.
  - subjectHarold 8y ago
    Ah, I forgot...the most welcoming environments are ones where things are banned.
    - ellard 8y ago
      If you want to look at it that way, sure. Most communities ban certain behaviors to cultivate a welcoming culture for their target audience. Even HN has the guidelines which highly discourages certain posting behaviors to keep comment threads civil.
- basilgohar 8y ago
  I don't drink alcohol, and I also belong to one of the religions where alcohol is explicitly and strongly forbidden. As such, I avoid, as much as possible, where alcohol is served, which is challenging at times, but I make do. However, I never asked someone not to drink on account of me (though I've definitely given advice to avoid it to people as I would advise anyone to avoid something that is harmful, which I believe alcohol generally to be). My way of dealing with this is to avoid places expressly for the purpose of drinking alcohol (e.g., bars) and to avoid, as much as possible, being the presence of it when it's being drunk. But those are actions I impose on myself, and not others. I fail to see how this is conflicting with the accepted ideals of liberal democracy (which you ascribe to my entire faith, apparently) and how that is a judgment on people, or how what I do or believe concludes that people are unclean/mad/whatever. Having said all of that, if the accommodation were made to offer an alcohol-free alternative to something that otherwise is not, I would overwhelmingly welcome that, as I imagine anyone in the world would overwhelmingly welcome any accommodation to their own choice in beliefs, practices, limitations, or other factors that everyone has to some degree, as long as it were not cause to exclude anyone. One of the differences here is that, by choice, I cannot drink and prefer not to be around alcohol, but I fail to see how a lack of alcohol is an equally discriminating thing. I would argue keeping alcohol out, while maybe less enjoyable for some, would make the environment overall better for most due to the lack of people getting drunk and doing things they otherwise would not do, cost would be significantly reduced, and once again, allowing more people to attend than could otherwise due to the reasons outlined throughout this conversation.
tnolet 8y ago
Why was diversity here the reason for banning this stuff? I would expect the opposite: diverse as in many options, differences and preferences, not in restricting and banning. Was this in US by chance?
- duaoebg 8y ago
  In the Bay Area. The restrictions were from a mix of Hindu and Muslim. They made official complaints to upper management that effectivly banned the occasional lunch time beers and Friday afternoon drinks. It was one or two beers, it’s not like people were getting belligerent. After the complaints the only sanctioned events were vegetarian restaurants that didn’t serve alcohol.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]

subjectHarold 8y ago

I think the boundary is well-defined (tech companies are not the first companies to hire people): don't drink alcohol at work, don't smoke weed at work (even if it is legal), and don't come to work drunk or high. If it is a social event outside the work place/hours, you can drink but don't get fucked up and vomit in a pint glass. If weed is legal, you can go outside and smoke like tobacco but, again, don't get fucked up and try to hump a pot plant or something. Simple.

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]

tnolet 8y ago

Well, this 100% depends on the cultural context. In many countries work and alcohol are fairly normal and not considered an issue. Go to the south of France and get a job there, you’ll see a very interesting take on this topic.

jstanley 8y ago

> Should I be able to spark up a joint, too? Yes

ams6110 8y ago
How about smoking a cigarrette?

darkpuma 8y ago

> Should I be able to spark up a joint, too? That’s just as legal as alcohol here. Considering it's almost certainly illegal to spark up a cigarette in that same context, since there are laws against smoke indoors almost everywhere, I question whether it actually is "just as legal" for you to spark up a joint. But what I can tell you from my experience in Seattle, if you failed to be discrete about eating a brownie, you'd find yourself hounded by people who wanted some too.

Mediterraneo10 8y ago

> Should I be able to spark up a joint, too? Sparking up a joint in hotels or university buildings is unlikely, as smoking is already banned indoors. But greater acceptance of sparking up a joint elsewhere may well be coming. When I traveled around Uruguay in the time after marijuana was legalized, I occasionally found that customer-facing people like a bicycle repairman or greengrocer were smoking a joint while serving me.