7 ms·

No you really don't get it. At my company that I was formally employed at before moving on to my current startup, we had a minority of employees very aggressiv

by JPKab 5y ago

No you really don't get it. At my company that I was formally employed at before moving on to my current startup, we had a minority of employees very aggressively and vocally demanding that the CEO issue an anti-racism statement after the George Floyd murder. A statement was issue condemning what happened and racism. They were not satisfied with this and demanded that the exact words black lives matter be used and also that a donation to the BLM organization be made. The company sold data analysis software targeted at Excel power users. It didn't have any offices in Minnesota. The idea that the company needed to make these statements was insane. They don't control police forces in Minneapolis they don't control police forces anywhere. It is literally not their business to comment on these matters. And something I have repeatedly stated and noticed is that the employees making these demands are mediocre at best. I rarely see talented developers doing this because they're too busy working.

andrewmd5 5y ago
> I rarely see talented developers doing this because they're too busy working. I love the privilege on display here. You can ignore racial inequality issues because "they are too distracting," meanwhile I have to wake up each morning, read yet another one of my brothers and sisters has been killed by police, and I still have to run my business. Your mediocrity exist in your complacently to the status-quo. On a daily basis we innovate, build, ship, and push tech more than you could ever hope -- and we don't need to ban "political discussions" at work. If a business chooses to condemn something without backing up that solidarity with meaningful resources and capital, they should be criticized.
- JPKab 5y ago
  You have no idea how much software I ship, but like your ideology, you make assertions without data. You act as if the only people who are killed by police are "one of my brothers and sisters". Let's unpack that, shall we? https://mappingpoliceviolence.org/ https://mappingpoliceviolence.org/ Roughly 3/4 of people killed by police in the US are not one of your "brothers and sisters" if by "brothers and sisters" you are referring to humans who share your melanin content and location of ancestral origin (of course all humans are descended from African humans, but to suit the purposes of demagogues, we can ignore that and just stop at the arbitrary point in lineage where we can maximize division to reap power). As you read this, it is extremely likely that you cant name a single one of the non-black people killed by police last year, can you? Of course not. Or even in the last 5 years, can you? There are 3 times as many of these people as the group you are ethnocentrically focused on. Let's also talk about the "sisters" aspect. Statistically, women killed by police are minimal. The referenced website, run by activists, removed the filter for women, but you can download the data yourself to see that it's a minimal amount. Based on the logic of this movement created by people who don't understand basic stats, the discrepancy between men and women must mean that police are systemically sexist against men, right? Because only the outcome matters, and all explanations except bigotry must be ignored. A big difference these days is that when a non-black person is wrongfully shot by police, the complete lack of national media coverage allows the police to get off scot free. See Daniel Shaver, who was recorded on camera being executed, unarmed in his underwear, begging for his life, by a psycho cop. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uv_eyGw4s3w https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uv_eyGw4s3w Unlike Chauvin, said psycho cop was exonerated and dismissed with a full pension, as if he honorable retired. Where were you and BLM? Nowhere, because it's a bigoted, ethnocentric movement designed to divide rather than unite. You should ask yourself why you used the phrase "brothers and sisters" about people who share your ethnnicity, and why you don't use it for all humans, like I do. Ask yourself if you've been sucked into the precursor to pure racism, ethnocentrism. Ask yourself if you've allowed yourself to be misinformed by media designed to monetize your confirmation bias, rather than inform you.
  - SantalBlush 5y ago
    From the first website you link: >Black people were 28% of those killed by police in 2020 despite being only 13% of the population. You basically just proved the point you were replying to, that racial inequality exists in policing.
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
    - vtail 5y ago
      This is a very naive view. Black people are responsible for higher share of murders, for example, than their share of population. We should look at the frequency of interactions with the police, not at the population shares.
    - JPKab 5y ago
      Apparently gender inequality exists in policing as well. Why do police almost exclusively murder males, in your opinion? I'm asking in good faith, because I think you have insightful comments and I'm curious, even if I disagree with you on a few things.
      - conductr 5y ago
        I don’t have data to link to but I’m almost certain that if men and women are 50/50 then crime, or police interactions, are more like 80/20. Add onto that math that males have a higher level of aggression and physical ability to pose a threat and I feel the majority of your delta is explained. Just knowing the percentage of men owning guns is way higher than women owning guns would change your perceived threat level based on sex. https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/06/29/how-male-and-female-gun-owners-in-the-u-s-compare/ https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/06/29/how-male-an... Also feels safe to assume men murder at a higher rate, are cereal killers, and generally a more dangerous type of human than a female.
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
- throwaway789256 5y ago
  What do you want businesses to do? Should they all commit meaningful resources and capital to social justice? What about climate change? Should they also commit meaningful capital and resources to that? How should they balance those with other priorities, like their fiduciary duty to their shareholders?
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- nomdep 5y ago
  > meanwhile I have to wake up each morning, read yet another one of my brothers and sisters has been killed… Unless they have the same parents, they are not your brothers and sisters more than OP is. Imagine an us-vs-then based on skin color is extremely racist and should be criticized.
tshaddox 5y ago
I believe there is a lot of ground between "companies ought to issue every statement demanded by any employee" and "companies ought to explicitly prohibit any workplace discussion about anything that can remotely be considered political."
nicbou 5y ago
What is the playbook for a situation like this?
- SvenMarquardt 5y ago
  Don’t hire woke folk. How? 95% of the employees that left Basecamp have pronouns in their Twitter bios. There’s your signal.
- TheSisko 5y ago
  Using the words "black lives matter" and making a donation to a BLM affiliated group. It's basic, morally right, and easily completed during a single lunch break. There's absolutely no reason to overthink this.
  - JPKab 5y ago
    This ignores the fact that BLM affiliated groups are far more than race focused, and wrap in huge chunks of neo Marxist and post modernist ideology, such as calling for dissolution of nuclear families as the core social unit. BLM and their cohorts were never elected to be representatives of black Americans. The default assumption of upper middle class whites who grew up in segregated suburbs is that they must be representative and most black Americans share their very radical views. I can assure you they do not and opinion polls show this. I spent a few years in foster care and the best family I was in was a black family in Virginia where the head of household was a police officer and his wife was a public defender in a neighboring county. They and most of their church congregation absolutely despise black lives matter the organization, not the message obviously. The organization gave itself that name to deliberately overload a moral message with their off-putting, alien, and radical ideology. Your comment is proof that this strategy worked because if I disagree with any single element of the organization and therefore don't donate, according to your comment I am no longer morally correct and must not think that black lives matter. It's a simplistic and moralistic take evidence by your absolute moral certainty.
TheSisko 5y ago
> A statement was issue condemning what happened and racism. They were not satisfied with this and demanded that the exact words black lives matter be used and also that a donation to the BLM organization be made. It's weird that hold this case up as an example of unreasonable behavior on the employees part when in actuality their requests are extremely normal and reasonable.
- remram 5y ago
  Giving money yourself is one thing, or asking about a company match even. Asking that your company or anybody give their money towards any cause you care about is unreasonable. In the absence of any specific connection to your business, there are plenty of worthy causes (race inequalities, but also gender inequalities, world hunger, ...) and you can't demand that your company (or any company) actively contribute to all of them lest they be called out for being anti-X.

by JPKab 5y ago

andrewmd5 5y ago

> I rarely see talented developers doing this because they're too busy working. I love the privilege on display here. You can ignore racial inequality issues because "they are too distracting," meanwhile I have to wake up each morning, read yet another one of my brothers and sisters has been killed by police, and I still have to run my business. Your mediocrity exist in your complacently to the status-quo. On a daily basis we innovate, build, ship, and push tech more than you could ever hope -- and we don't need to ban "political discussions" at work. If a business chooses to condemn something without backing up that solidarity with meaningful resources and capital, they should be criticized.

JPKab 5y ago
You have no idea how much software I ship, but like your ideology, you make assertions without data. You act as if the only people who are killed by police are "one of my brothers and sisters". Let's unpack that, shall we? https://mappingpoliceviolence.org/ https://mappingpoliceviolence.org/ Roughly 3/4 of people killed by police in the US are not one of your "brothers and sisters" if by "brothers and sisters" you are referring to humans who share your melanin content and location of ancestral origin (of course all humans are descended from African humans, but to suit the purposes of demagogues, we can ignore that and just stop at the arbitrary point in lineage where we can maximize division to reap power). As you read this, it is extremely likely that you cant name a single one of the non-black people killed by police last year, can you? Of course not. Or even in the last 5 years, can you? There are 3 times as many of these people as the group you are ethnocentrically focused on. Let's also talk about the "sisters" aspect. Statistically, women killed by police are minimal. The referenced website, run by activists, removed the filter for women, but you can download the data yourself to see that it's a minimal amount. Based on the logic of this movement created by people who don't understand basic stats, the discrepancy between men and women must mean that police are systemically sexist against men, right? Because only the outcome matters, and all explanations except bigotry must be ignored. A big difference these days is that when a non-black person is wrongfully shot by police, the complete lack of national media coverage allows the police to get off scot free. See Daniel Shaver, who was recorded on camera being executed, unarmed in his underwear, begging for his life, by a psycho cop. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uv_eyGw4s3w https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uv_eyGw4s3w Unlike Chauvin, said psycho cop was exonerated and dismissed with a full pension, as if he honorable retired. Where were you and BLM? Nowhere, because it's a bigoted, ethnocentric movement designed to divide rather than unite. You should ask yourself why you used the phrase "brothers and sisters" about people who share your ethnnicity, and why you don't use it for all humans, like I do. Ask yourself if you've been sucked into the precursor to pure racism, ethnocentrism. Ask yourself if you've allowed yourself to be misinformed by media designed to monetize your confirmation bias, rather than inform you.
- SantalBlush 5y ago
  From the first website you link: >Black people were 28% of those killed by police in 2020 despite being only 13% of the population. You basically just proved the point you were replying to, that racial inequality exists in policing.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - vtail 5y ago
    This is a very naive view. Black people are responsible for higher share of murders, for example, than their share of population. We should look at the frequency of interactions with the police, not at the population shares.
  - JPKab 5y ago
    Apparently gender inequality exists in policing as well. Why do police almost exclusively murder males, in your opinion? I'm asking in good faith, because I think you have insightful comments and I'm curious, even if I disagree with you on a few things.
    - conductr 5y ago
      I don’t have data to link to but I’m almost certain that if men and women are 50/50 then crime, or police interactions, are more like 80/20. Add onto that math that males have a higher level of aggression and physical ability to pose a threat and I feel the majority of your delta is explained. Just knowing the percentage of men owning guns is way higher than women owning guns would change your perceived threat level based on sex. https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/06/29/how-male-and-female-gun-owners-in-the-u-s-compare/ https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/06/29/how-male-an... Also feels safe to assume men murder at a higher rate, are cereal killers, and generally a more dangerous type of human than a female.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
throwaway789256 5y ago
What do you want businesses to do? Should they all commit meaningful resources and capital to social justice? What about climate change? Should they also commit meaningful capital and resources to that? How should they balance those with other priorities, like their fiduciary duty to their shareholders?
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
nomdep 5y ago
> meanwhile I have to wake up each morning, read yet another one of my brothers and sisters has been killed… Unless they have the same parents, they are not your brothers and sisters more than OP is. Imagine an us-vs-then based on skin color is extremely racist and should be criticized.

tshaddox 5y ago

I believe there is a lot of ground between "companies ought to issue every statement demanded by any employee" and "companies ought to explicitly prohibit any workplace discussion about anything that can remotely be considered political."

nicbou 5y ago

What is the playbook for a situation like this?

SvenMarquardt 5y ago
Don’t hire woke folk. How? 95% of the employees that left Basecamp have pronouns in their Twitter bios. There’s your signal.
TheSisko 5y ago
Using the words "black lives matter" and making a donation to a BLM affiliated group. It's basic, morally right, and easily completed during a single lunch break. There's absolutely no reason to overthink this.
- JPKab 5y ago
  This ignores the fact that BLM affiliated groups are far more than race focused, and wrap in huge chunks of neo Marxist and post modernist ideology, such as calling for dissolution of nuclear families as the core social unit. BLM and their cohorts were never elected to be representatives of black Americans. The default assumption of upper middle class whites who grew up in segregated suburbs is that they must be representative and most black Americans share their very radical views. I can assure you they do not and opinion polls show this. I spent a few years in foster care and the best family I was in was a black family in Virginia where the head of household was a police officer and his wife was a public defender in a neighboring county. They and most of their church congregation absolutely despise black lives matter the organization, not the message obviously. The organization gave itself that name to deliberately overload a moral message with their off-putting, alien, and radical ideology. Your comment is proof that this strategy worked because if I disagree with any single element of the organization and therefore don't donate, according to your comment I am no longer morally correct and must not think that black lives matter. It's a simplistic and moralistic take evidence by your absolute moral certainty.

TheSisko 5y ago

> A statement was issue condemning what happened and racism. They were not satisfied with this and demanded that the exact words black lives matter be used and also that a donation to the BLM organization be made. It's weird that hold this case up as an example of unreasonable behavior on the employees part when in actuality their requests are extremely normal and reasonable.

remram 5y ago
Giving money yourself is one thing, or asking about a company match even. Asking that your company or anybody give their money towards any cause you care about is unreasonable. In the absence of any specific connection to your business, there are plenty of worthy causes (race inequalities, but also gender inequalities, world hunger, ...) and you can't demand that your company (or any company) actively contribute to all of them lest they be called out for being anti-X.