3 ms·

> Society's use of oil and gas is a totally political question of how much pain we experience in the near term vs the long term and who pays for any trade-offs

> Society's use of oil and gas is a totally political question of how much pain we experience in the near term vs the long term and who pays for any trade-offs that get made. It is not kosher for employees of a company to use their corporate position to push what are private political goals. lol, yes, when it comes to oil and gas, it's widely expected that companies not push for political goals. Oil and gas companies companies steer well clear of those politics. Yep.

viridian 7y ago
Your comment is the least charitable possible interpretation of the above user's statement, and adds nothing except for biting sarcasm to the discussion. I hope that every user here tries to leave hacker news a better, more thoughtful place than they found it.
- magicalist 7y ago
  > Your comment is the least charitable possible interpretation of the above user's statement Please, do tell, then. Because "that's not a nice reaction" is not the same as an uncharitable interpretation. It's ridiculous on its face to call for employees of a company to not engage in politics and define the use of oil and gas as political and therefore out of bounds, when the actions being taken here are engaging with the actions of oil and gas companies. (leaving aside the idea that it's ok for me, internet commentator, to have strong opinions, but not the employees that make some product I use)
  - viridian 7y ago
    You interpreted "employees of a company to use their corporate position to push what are private political goals" as "companies not push[ing] for political goals" in order to sarcastically respond. There is a difference between a company and it's individual employees, and rephrasing the statement such that "employees of a company" is replaced with "a company" in order to mock a user is rude and also not substantive.
    - magicalist 7y ago
      > There is a difference between a company and it's individual employees, and rephrasing the statement such that "employees of a company" is replaced with "a company" Unless there's a good argument that managers and executives are somehow different than other employees, companies pushing for political goals absolutely are employees of a company using their position to push private political goals.
      - cbnotfromthere 7y ago
        Unless there's a good argument that managers and executives are somehow different than other employees By definition managers/executives are different than (other) employees. That's why managers / executives can't unionize. That's why managers / executives represent the company, while the (other) employees just work there. Clear now?

viridian 7y ago

Your comment is the least charitable possible interpretation of the above user's statement, and adds nothing except for biting sarcasm to the discussion. I hope that every user here tries to leave hacker news a better, more thoughtful place than they found it.

magicalist 7y ago
> Your comment is the least charitable possible interpretation of the above user's statement Please, do tell, then. Because "that's not a nice reaction" is not the same as an uncharitable interpretation. It's ridiculous on its face to call for employees of a company to not engage in politics and define the use of oil and gas as political and therefore out of bounds, when the actions being taken here are engaging with the actions of oil and gas companies. (leaving aside the idea that it's ok for me, internet commentator, to have strong opinions, but not the employees that make some product I use)
- viridian 7y ago
  You interpreted "employees of a company to use their corporate position to push what are private political goals" as "companies not push[ing] for political goals" in order to sarcastically respond. There is a difference between a company and it's individual employees, and rephrasing the statement such that "employees of a company" is replaced with "a company" in order to mock a user is rude and also not substantive.
  - magicalist 7y ago
    > There is a difference between a company and it's individual employees, and rephrasing the statement such that "employees of a company" is replaced with "a company" Unless there's a good argument that managers and executives are somehow different than other employees, companies pushing for political goals absolutely are employees of a company using their position to push private political goals.
    - cbnotfromthere 7y ago
      Unless there's a good argument that managers and executives are somehow different than other employees By definition managers/executives are different than (other) employees. That's why managers / executives can't unionize. That's why managers / executives represent the company, while the (other) employees just work there. Clear now?