5 ms·

Gitlab decided to not hire people living in China/Russia because of all risks linked to the Chinese/Russian government. Isn't censoring one of their employee t

Gitlab decided to not hire people living in China/Russia because of all risks linked to the Chinese/Russian government. Isn't censoring one of their employee to not enflame the situation would be what China/Russia would do with their citizen for the same reason? kind of an ironic situation.

Certhas 7y ago
Governments and corporations doing something are not at all equivalent. Being put in prison for running a blog is not equivalent to having to run a blog because facebook wont have you.
9dl 7y ago
It is more like damage control People who strongly disagree with rf/china government CAN not normally live in that countries So normal Russian/Chinese do not have rf/china citizenship
- konart 7y ago
  So people who can't leave Russia/China for any reason (let's say sick relative) are not normal? And what does citizenship has to do with "living"?
frenchyatwork 7y ago
There's certainly irony, or at least contradiction, here; but there's also a huge difference. In North America, companies regularly try to censor their employees; in China, the government regularly tries to censor its citizens. In both cases though, the government is the only one with the authority to enact violence on its citizens. So while the most Gitlab can do is fire Candice, or censor communications she makes on their platform; in China, such dissension could get you locked up, exiled, or disappeared. Note: I have no love for the sort of thing Gitlab is doing here. It's petty.
- tracker1 7y ago
  I think editing the comment brought undue attention to it... in the end, a politely worded response as a comment would have probably worked out better.
- cnst 7y ago
  > So while the most Gitlab can do is fire Candice, or censor communications she makes on their platform; in China, such dissension could get you locked up, exiled, or disappeared. This is a bit of a short-sighted argument, because in our times, pretty much everyone lives beyond their means, from paycheque to paycheque; if you're a tech worker in SF, you're probably not an exception to this rule, either. So, if you suddenly find yourself out of a job, and potentially unhireable due to your unwillingness to compromise on issues such as these, then how's that much different from being locked up, exiled or disappeared? And you have to remember, Epstein didn't kill himself, either.
munmaek 7y ago
No. Gitlab discussed defining a policy to not hire Chinese/Russian nationals. They did not decide to not hire them, someone just made an issue to discuss it, which then got linked.
- AnonGitLabEmpl 7y ago
  Nah, we did decide to not hire them. The issue blew up before we merged the change. As far as I can tell we are going to continue with the policy.
- clemmakesapps 7y ago
  Fwiw, GitLab was discussing about a policy not to hire residents of China and Russia for specific job families. It was never about nationality.
mbesto 7y ago
> Isn't censoring one of their employee to not enflame the situation would be what China/Russia would do with their citizen for the same reason? kind of an ironic situation. One of these entities is a sovereign government and the other is a for profit company. I'm not sure I understand where the irony lies.

Certhas 7y ago

Governments and corporations doing something are not at all equivalent. Being put in prison for running a blog is not equivalent to having to run a blog because facebook wont have you.

9dl 7y ago

It is more like damage control People who strongly disagree with rf/china government CAN not normally live in that countries So normal Russian/Chinese do not have rf/china citizenship

konart 7y ago
So people who can't leave Russia/China for any reason (let's say sick relative) are not normal? And what does citizenship has to do with "living"?

frenchyatwork 7y ago

There's certainly irony, or at least contradiction, here; but there's also a huge difference. In North America, companies regularly try to censor their employees; in China, the government regularly tries to censor its citizens. In both cases though, the government is the only one with the authority to enact violence on its citizens. So while the most Gitlab can do is fire Candice, or censor communications she makes on their platform; in China, such dissension could get you locked up, exiled, or disappeared. Note: I have no love for the sort of thing Gitlab is doing here. It's petty.

tracker1 7y ago
I think editing the comment brought undue attention to it... in the end, a politely worded response as a comment would have probably worked out better.
cnst 7y ago
> So while the most Gitlab can do is fire Candice, or censor communications she makes on their platform; in China, such dissension could get you locked up, exiled, or disappeared. This is a bit of a short-sighted argument, because in our times, pretty much everyone lives beyond their means, from paycheque to paycheque; if you're a tech worker in SF, you're probably not an exception to this rule, either. So, if you suddenly find yourself out of a job, and potentially unhireable due to your unwillingness to compromise on issues such as these, then how's that much different from being locked up, exiled or disappeared? And you have to remember, Epstein didn't kill himself, either.

munmaek 7y ago

No. Gitlab discussed defining a policy to not hire Chinese/Russian nationals. They did not decide to not hire them, someone just made an issue to discuss it, which then got linked.

AnonGitLabEmpl 7y ago
Nah, we did decide to not hire them. The issue blew up before we merged the change. As far as I can tell we are going to continue with the policy.
clemmakesapps 7y ago
Fwiw, GitLab was discussing about a policy not to hire residents of China and Russia for specific job families. It was never about nationality.

mbesto 7y ago

> Isn't censoring one of their employee to not enflame the situation would be what China/Russia would do with their citizen for the same reason? kind of an ironic situation. One of these entities is a sovereign government and the other is a for profit company. I'm not sure I understand where the irony lies.