7 ms·

So if an employee has an active Twitter account where they regularly post overtly racist content, these are companies that will promise to keep them employed, r

So if an employee has an active Twitter account where they regularly post overtly racist content, these are companies that will promise to keep them employed, regardless of, for example, complaints from other employees who are people of color? Sounds like a train wreck waiting to happen. Also, who wants to work for a company that is essentially reaching out to hire more racists?

imwillofficial 5y ago
People like you are why that site exists. The endlessly increasing list called “racist” is getting tiresome for those who want to simply speak their truth.
- fxbe12 5y ago
  Word
  - seanw444 5y ago
    Went to reply to the parent comment, and it got flagged. Jeez. Wasn't even advocating for racism. Hacker News is becoming tech nerd Twitter.
- dang 5y ago
  Personal attacks are not allowed here, regardless of how wrong someone else is or you feel they are. Please review the rules and stick to them: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html. Edit: we've warned you many times about breaking the site guidelines and your recent comments have mostly (exclusively?) been flamebait and/or unsubstantive. If you continue like that we're going to have to ban you, so please fix this.
  - monkey_monkey 5y ago
    It's curious that you've given this person so many chances when others seem to get banned almost immediately.
    - imwillofficial 5y ago
      Hopefully he senses my comments are not not malicious. My comments are not intended to start flame wars or attack people personally. I am passionate and assertive, while also clearly lacking some insight into properly conveying my ideas in a way appropriate for this venue. I do care about not offending people, and having comments move the conversation forward. I often fall short of that goal. In short: big heart, stupid mouth, work in progress.
    - dang 5y ago
      I give lots of people lots of chances (you too, it turns out!). You're right that that's not always the case, but it is not nearly as arbitrary as it might appear. The trouble is that there are so many factors that it would be hard to write about in general. If you have specific questions I can try to answer them. (But please let's try to avoid the lobbying-to-get-specific-person-banned direction - I don't mean to project that onto you, it's just come up in other contexts lately and there's always something distasteful about it, especially when it's clearly for ideological battle reasons.)
Minor49er 5y ago
I doubt it will get that far. What's likely going to happen, if anything, is that companies will use this as a regular job board and will terminate problem employees as they already do. There doesn't seem to be any obvious way for employees to report a company. Further still, many of their job listings are with staffing agencies, which would only make it harder for RedBalloon to accomplish their goal since it adds a middleman between them and the employer.
- BizarroLand 5y ago
  I looked through the jobs and they also pay pretty abysmally. $16/hr for a bookmaker on Oregon, $17/hr for CSAM in LA,$17 for a warehouse worker in Washington. Most of these places have a minimum wage of $11-$15/hr, so they're paying pretty much nothing for hard labor tedious jobs.
OrvalWintermute 5y ago
> post overtly racist content Define racist content, and what is not racist content. EDIT: I am serious, since Twitter mobs define it in a way that suits a political agenda, obviously, to "cancel" someone. EDIT PS: Bring the downvotes.
- throwaway894345 5y ago
  Not sure why this is downvoted. A popular refrain throughout the BLM years was "you can't be racist against whites" (and to a lesser extent "Asians and Jews are white-adjacent" with the heavy implication that it's okay to discriminate against them") which certainly suggests that a lot of people misunderstand "racism" (or if you prefer, they've overloaded the word with a new meaning and one which is literally racist, per the standard meaning).
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - SuoDuanDao 5y ago
    I believe filter bubbles have gotten so powerful that the English language is actually diverging as a result. The various meanings of 'racism' is one example, I call them neoracism and classical racism to distinguish.
    - OrvalWintermute 5y ago
      > The various meanings of 'racism' is one example, I call them neoracism and classical racism to distinguish. I believe you make an excellent point What much of the mainstream population interprets as racist behavior (a significant example being WW2 caricatures) would be considered both classically racist, and neoracist. The Soft Bigotry of Low Expectations would also be considered by many to be classically racist, but not neoracist. As neoracism views everything through a lense distorted by privilege theory, hegemony, and critical race theory, this would instead be viewed as a counter to previous racism. "Sure, give the unprivileged a leg up at the expense of the privileged, that white man doesn't need it." If we apply the same to sexism, there are then two definitions of sexism - a classical one, and a neosexist one. One affirms what we know biologically speaking are the differences, and tendencies. Neosexism on the other hand, is viewed through a gender theory lense, tempered with CRT and privilege theory, completely malleable, and in many cases, rejecting the science of biology. Level setting to disadvantage men would be a plus. However, in neosexism, the pecking order would start with men at the lowest, followed by genetic women, and then into modified/self-identified and others. We could also carry this though in sexual preference, ethnicity, religion, etc. For example, classical discrimination against traditionalist religious groups such as Christians, Muslims, and Observant Jews are frowned upon. But, in a neo-sense, discrimination against them, for having privilege or being part of power structures, would be a benefit, even, dare I say, celebrated, particularly if they benefit from Western Civilization. This goes a long way towards explaining what we can observe as outgrowth of Critical Theory / Privilege Theory.
luxuryballs 5y ago
Heck this may be the better approach compared with tolerating only “one directional” racism or being vague about what is it isn’t racism. Let people hash it out, let them learn and change over time, but if they are good at their job let them do it. It’s already illegal to discriminate but should we really demand that everyone like each other too? Keep work out of politics not just politics out of work.
- kelnos 5y ago
  Not wanting to hire people who are racist isn't being "political", it's just basic human respect for your employees who are targets of that racism.
  - nitrogen 5y ago
    What matters is what happens at work. I don't care how bizarre my coworkers' beliefs are, as long as work and non-work are compartmentalized. If you segregate people based on belief, then you amplify division and intolerance.
    - kelnos 5y ago
      Racist people don't magically become unbiased in the workplace. I would not inflict a racist manager on a direct report who would be the target of that racism. Even if the manager isn't overtly throwing around racist slurs, to it's vanishingly unlikely they'd set their biases aside when it comes to promotion time (for example). Your characterization of racism as a "belief" is alarming.
      - nitrogen 5y ago
        Your characterization of racism as a "belief" is alarming. What word would you use for something someone believes is true, even if it isn't? I'm having a really hard time imagining what's wrong with the word "belief" here, to talk about the state of someone's mental expectations of the world. Racist people don't magically become unbiased in the workplace. People can and do change, and most of them can compartmentalize in the mean time. "Racist" is not a fundamental, unchangeable attribute of a person, and it's too easy to scope creep once you've got the weapon of ostracism and censorship ready at hand. No matter how wrong they are, we can't just permanently deny people access to jobs and public life. That makes them martyrs.
throwaway894345 5y ago
Why should we make every speech policy around the extreme fringe of content? Overtly racist content does happen too often including against white people in the BLM era--which isn't to say that whites have it harder or any such thing--but why does that justify policies that restrict lots of socially critical speech (e.g., challenging the factual basis for a given movement or citing research on the efficacy of nonviolent protest or publishing an interview with a Black man whose views defy media stereotypes [0])? [0]: https://nymag.com/intelligencer/amp/2020/06/case-for-liberalism-tom-cotton-new-york-times-james-bennet.html https://nymag.com/intelligencer/amp/2020/06/case-for-liberal... I get that it's hard to craft precise moderation rules, but drafting policy based on the rare exception seems strictly harmful.
SuoDuanDao 5y ago
Supporting free speech and being a racist are not the same thing. If implying they are ever becomes as taboo as overt racism is today, would you expect supporters of free speech to defend you?
- sofixa 5y ago
  I think their point is that the people who complain about their free speech being stifled for being fired after a twitter or tiktok spat are usually, far more often than not, the type that berated young women for their swimwear or were spewing racist stuff.
  - SuoDuanDao 5y ago
    That's probably true, but I don't think it's relevant. An awful lot of us who don't find our own speech being stifled still don't want the free speech of others infringed either. I may not have anything dangerous to say today, but I should still defend my right to say something dangerous tomorrow.
    - AussieWog93 5y ago
      >An awful lot of us who don't find our own speech being stifled still don't want the free speech of others infringed either. Citation needed there. If someone makes sexist and racist comments, their coworkers often conspire to get them fired.
drcongo 5y ago
This site provides a very valuable service, with a list of companies to never ever deal with or work for.
aaron695 5y ago
The problem is more what about companies that also hire people like yourself? How can those of us who are good human beings get out of this nightmare society where evil people keep talking about what people Twitter in their private time. What guarantees do we have that companies only hires from RedBalloon, not to dismiss it, RedBalloon is a great start. We are certainly rich enough to have two society's. You can have your lynch mobs (It's a genetic thing, it's not a new idea, certain people like these things more than others) the rest of us can live our own lives as we see fit. But how do we separate us.

imwillofficial 5y ago

People like you are why that site exists. The endlessly increasing list called “racist” is getting tiresome for those who want to simply speak their truth.

fxbe12 5y ago
Word
- seanw444 5y ago
  Went to reply to the parent comment, and it got flagged. Jeez. Wasn't even advocating for racism. Hacker News is becoming tech nerd Twitter.
dang 5y ago
Personal attacks are not allowed here, regardless of how wrong someone else is or you feel they are. Please review the rules and stick to them: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html. Edit: we've warned you many times about breaking the site guidelines and your recent comments have mostly (exclusively?) been flamebait and/or unsubstantive. If you continue like that we're going to have to ban you, so please fix this.
- monkey_monkey 5y ago
  It's curious that you've given this person so many chances when others seem to get banned almost immediately.
  - imwillofficial 5y ago
    Hopefully he senses my comments are not not malicious. My comments are not intended to start flame wars or attack people personally. I am passionate and assertive, while also clearly lacking some insight into properly conveying my ideas in a way appropriate for this venue. I do care about not offending people, and having comments move the conversation forward. I often fall short of that goal. In short: big heart, stupid mouth, work in progress.
  - dang 5y ago
    I give lots of people lots of chances (you too, it turns out!). You're right that that's not always the case, but it is not nearly as arbitrary as it might appear. The trouble is that there are so many factors that it would be hard to write about in general. If you have specific questions I can try to answer them. (But please let's try to avoid the lobbying-to-get-specific-person-banned direction - I don't mean to project that onto you, it's just come up in other contexts lately and there's always something distasteful about it, especially when it's clearly for ideological battle reasons.)

Minor49er 5y ago

I doubt it will get that far. What's likely going to happen, if anything, is that companies will use this as a regular job board and will terminate problem employees as they already do. There doesn't seem to be any obvious way for employees to report a company. Further still, many of their job listings are with staffing agencies, which would only make it harder for RedBalloon to accomplish their goal since it adds a middleman between them and the employer.

BizarroLand 5y ago
I looked through the jobs and they also pay pretty abysmally. $16/hr for a bookmaker on Oregon, $17/hr for CSAM in LA,$17 for a warehouse worker in Washington. Most of these places have a minimum wage of $11-$15/hr, so they're paying pretty much nothing for hard labor tedious jobs.

OrvalWintermute 5y ago

> post overtly racist content Define racist content, and what is not racist content. EDIT: I am serious, since Twitter mobs define it in a way that suits a political agenda, obviously, to "cancel" someone. EDIT PS: Bring the downvotes.

throwaway894345 5y ago
Not sure why this is downvoted. A popular refrain throughout the BLM years was "you can't be racist against whites" (and to a lesser extent "Asians and Jews are white-adjacent" with the heavy implication that it's okay to discriminate against them") which certainly suggests that a lot of people misunderstand "racism" (or if you prefer, they've overloaded the word with a new meaning and one which is literally racist, per the standard meaning).
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- SuoDuanDao 5y ago
  I believe filter bubbles have gotten so powerful that the English language is actually diverging as a result. The various meanings of 'racism' is one example, I call them neoracism and classical racism to distinguish.
  - OrvalWintermute 5y ago
    > The various meanings of 'racism' is one example, I call them neoracism and classical racism to distinguish. I believe you make an excellent point What much of the mainstream population interprets as racist behavior (a significant example being WW2 caricatures) would be considered both classically racist, and neoracist. The Soft Bigotry of Low Expectations would also be considered by many to be classically racist, but not neoracist. As neoracism views everything through a lense distorted by privilege theory, hegemony, and critical race theory, this would instead be viewed as a counter to previous racism. "Sure, give the unprivileged a leg up at the expense of the privileged, that white man doesn't need it." If we apply the same to sexism, there are then two definitions of sexism - a classical one, and a neosexist one. One affirms what we know biologically speaking are the differences, and tendencies. Neosexism on the other hand, is viewed through a gender theory lense, tempered with CRT and privilege theory, completely malleable, and in many cases, rejecting the science of biology. Level setting to disadvantage men would be a plus. However, in neosexism, the pecking order would start with men at the lowest, followed by genetic women, and then into modified/self-identified and others. We could also carry this though in sexual preference, ethnicity, religion, etc. For example, classical discrimination against traditionalist religious groups such as Christians, Muslims, and Observant Jews are frowned upon. But, in a neo-sense, discrimination against them, for having privilege or being part of power structures, would be a benefit, even, dare I say, celebrated, particularly if they benefit from Western Civilization. This goes a long way towards explaining what we can observe as outgrowth of Critical Theory / Privilege Theory.

luxuryballs 5y ago

Heck this may be the better approach compared with tolerating only “one directional” racism or being vague about what is it isn’t racism. Let people hash it out, let them learn and change over time, but if they are good at their job let them do it. It’s already illegal to discriminate but should we really demand that everyone like each other too? Keep work out of politics not just politics out of work.

kelnos 5y ago
Not wanting to hire people who are racist isn't being "political", it's just basic human respect for your employees who are targets of that racism.
- nitrogen 5y ago
  What matters is what happens at work. I don't care how bizarre my coworkers' beliefs are, as long as work and non-work are compartmentalized. If you segregate people based on belief, then you amplify division and intolerance.
  - kelnos 5y ago
    Racist people don't magically become unbiased in the workplace. I would not inflict a racist manager on a direct report who would be the target of that racism. Even if the manager isn't overtly throwing around racist slurs, to it's vanishingly unlikely they'd set their biases aside when it comes to promotion time (for example). Your characterization of racism as a "belief" is alarming.
    - nitrogen 5y ago
      Your characterization of racism as a "belief" is alarming. What word would you use for something someone believes is true, even if it isn't? I'm having a really hard time imagining what's wrong with the word "belief" here, to talk about the state of someone's mental expectations of the world. Racist people don't magically become unbiased in the workplace. People can and do change, and most of them can compartmentalize in the mean time. "Racist" is not a fundamental, unchangeable attribute of a person, and it's too easy to scope creep once you've got the weapon of ostracism and censorship ready at hand. No matter how wrong they are, we can't just permanently deny people access to jobs and public life. That makes them martyrs.

throwaway894345 5y ago

Why should we make every speech policy around the extreme fringe of content? Overtly racist content does happen too often including against white people in the BLM era--which isn't to say that whites have it harder or any such thing--but why does that justify policies that restrict lots of socially critical speech (e.g., challenging the factual basis for a given movement or citing research on the efficacy of nonviolent protest or publishing an interview with a Black man whose views defy media stereotypes [0])? [0]: https://nymag.com/intelligencer/amp/2020/06/case-for-liberalism-tom-cotton-new-york-times-james-bennet.html https://nymag.com/intelligencer/amp/2020/06/case-for-liberal... I get that it's hard to craft precise moderation rules, but drafting policy based on the rare exception seems strictly harmful.

SuoDuanDao 5y ago

Supporting free speech and being a racist are not the same thing. If implying they are ever becomes as taboo as overt racism is today, would you expect supporters of free speech to defend you?

sofixa 5y ago
I think their point is that the people who complain about their free speech being stifled for being fired after a twitter or tiktok spat are usually, far more often than not, the type that berated young women for their swimwear or were spewing racist stuff.
- SuoDuanDao 5y ago
  That's probably true, but I don't think it's relevant. An awful lot of us who don't find our own speech being stifled still don't want the free speech of others infringed either. I may not have anything dangerous to say today, but I should still defend my right to say something dangerous tomorrow.
  - AussieWog93 5y ago
    >An awful lot of us who don't find our own speech being stifled still don't want the free speech of others infringed either. Citation needed there. If someone makes sexist and racist comments, their coworkers often conspire to get them fired.

drcongo 5y ago

This site provides a very valuable service, with a list of companies to never ever deal with or work for.

aaron695 5y ago

The problem is more what about companies that also hire people like yourself? How can those of us who are good human beings get out of this nightmare society where evil people keep talking about what people Twitter in their private time. What guarantees do we have that companies only hires from RedBalloon, not to dismiss it, RedBalloon is a great start. We are certainly rich enough to have two society's. You can have your lynch mobs (It's a genetic thing, it's not a new idea, certain people like these things more than others) the rest of us can live our own lives as we see fit. But how do we separate us.