9 ms·

Out of interest, why did you want a different answer? Do you think "diversity hires" don't exist? Whether they do or don't, it doesn't have any bearing on the "

by string 6y ago

Out of interest, why did you want a different answer? Do you think "diversity hires" don't exist? Whether they do or don't, it doesn't have any bearing on the "diverse" people being hired on the basis of their technical or professional abilities.

foldr 6y ago
My question was why the OP thought that these particular people are diversity hires. And as I said, the phrase 'diversity hire' is usually used to cast aspersions on people's abilities (though it is possible that the OP didn't want to do this and just made a questionable wording choice).
- thu2111 6y ago
  His entire post is about bad behaviour by employees, and he has just confirmed to you that if you were (visibly) LGBTQ it was impossible not to be hired there. Most likely also impossible to be fired given the OP's stories. That is exactly what you'd expect from a SF based firm that says it's committed to diversity hiring, because that word is code for "anyone who isn't a straight white man". That's why your response to me was not really in good faith. As the original writer later confirmed, the answer I gave you was correct - hiring standards vanished if you were the "best" orientation. Yet you just flatly rejected it and demanded an alternative (but wrong) answer you liked more. You also stated you wouldn't be able to discuss the issue without it "descending into a flame war", passive voice, implying that I'd be the one flaming you - that is also wrong. This seems to be an increasingly common tactic to avoid reading alternative viewpoints: just announce up front that polite debate is impossible, with the insinuation that it's the fault of other people. Not a great approach. From your other posts, you are feeling hurt that people might doubt your abilities because you're in a favoured class. Yes, that must really suck. We can all totally understand that. At the same time it sucks a lot more to be at that sort of company in a non favoured class.
  - foldr 6y ago
    'SJW' is Godwin 2.0. If you see LGBTQ people as a 'favored class' (!) then I don't think we can go anywhere with this. I'm not avoiding debate with regard to the issue raised in my original response to zxcvbn4038. I'm declining your invitation to have another debate that's been had over and over again many times before.

by string 6y ago

foldr 6y ago

My question was why the OP thought that these particular people are diversity hires. And as I said, the phrase 'diversity hire' is usually used to cast aspersions on people's abilities (though it is possible that the OP didn't want to do this and just made a questionable wording choice).

thu2111 6y ago
His entire post is about bad behaviour by employees, and he has just confirmed to you that if you were (visibly) LGBTQ it was impossible not to be hired there. Most likely also impossible to be fired given the OP's stories. That is exactly what you'd expect from a SF based firm that says it's committed to diversity hiring, because that word is code for "anyone who isn't a straight white man". That's why your response to me was not really in good faith. As the original writer later confirmed, the answer I gave you was correct - hiring standards vanished if you were the "best" orientation. Yet you just flatly rejected it and demanded an alternative (but wrong) answer you liked more. You also stated you wouldn't be able to discuss the issue without it "descending into a flame war", passive voice, implying that I'd be the one flaming you - that is also wrong. This seems to be an increasingly common tactic to avoid reading alternative viewpoints: just announce up front that polite debate is impossible, with the insinuation that it's the fault of other people. Not a great approach. From your other posts, you are feeling hurt that people might doubt your abilities because you're in a favoured class. Yes, that must really suck. We can all totally understand that. At the same time it sucks a lot more to be at that sort of company in a non favoured class.
- foldr 6y ago
  'SJW' is Godwin 2.0. If you see LGBTQ people as a 'favored class' (!) then I don't think we can go anywhere with this. I'm not avoiding debate with regard to the issue raised in my original response to zxcvbn4038. I'm declining your invitation to have another debate that's been had over and over again many times before.