4 ms·

It very much depends on the situation. Sure, some harmless things you do outside work shouldn't have any effect on your work. But if we're talking about someone

It very much depends on the situation. Sure, some harmless things you do outside work shouldn't have any effect on your work. But if we're talking about someone literally not believing that certain people (e.g. LGBT) should exist or have rights then I very much believe they can and should be shunned from everywhere regardless of whether they bring that bigotry to work or not. People have a right to not want to interact with others who make them uncomfortable. Imagine being forced to work with someone who doesn't want you to exist and being told to suck it up just because they don't explicitly express those views at work, only outside.

generalizations 4y ago
> It very much depends on the situation. Sure, some harmless things you do outside work shouldn't have any effect on your work. But... Pragmatically speaking, you shouldn't expect that the only exceptions to these general rules of civilized interaction are ones you like or agree with. > People have a right to not want to interact with others who make them uncomfortable. Imagine being forced to work... a) No one is being forced to work with anyone else. b) If a specific someone might not want to interact with someone else, don't make that decision for them.
FeepingCreature 4y ago
> being forced to work with someone who doesn't want you to exist Yes. That is what I endorse. Modulo "being forced to work"; I don't think anyone should be forced to work anyway, but that's not what this is about, it's about what's reasonable to expect. I think this is a reasonable thing to expect. Nobody was going to chain people to the keyboard while Brendan Eich was loitering in the room, aggressively existing at them while they worked. The question is, if one person cannot work with another, who is being unreasonable? Who should be forced to yield? In other words, is there a right to not be made uncomfortable by somebody's mere belief, no matter how vile, that supersedes the expectation of workplace civility? I do not believe in such a right - conversely, I believe that there is a duty of tolerance in the workplace; tolerance as a behavior, not as a state of mind. (Though, that said, I think Mozilla is far more symptom than cause.)
buscoquadnary 4y ago
Let's be clear here, he merely believes that marriage should be between a man and a woman. Not that he advocates for a gay pogrom, or that they should be deprived of due process or anything. This type of hyperbole is just as bad as calling him a Nazi.

generalizations 4y ago

> It very much depends on the situation. Sure, some harmless things you do outside work shouldn't have any effect on your work. But... Pragmatically speaking, you shouldn't expect that the only exceptions to these general rules of civilized interaction are ones you like or agree with. > People have a right to not want to interact with others who make them uncomfortable. Imagine being forced to work... a) No one is being forced to work with anyone else. b) If a specific someone might not want to interact with someone else, don't make that decision for them.

FeepingCreature 4y ago

> being forced to work with someone who doesn't want you to exist Yes. That is what I endorse. Modulo "being forced to work"; I don't think anyone should be forced to work anyway, but that's not what this is about, it's about what's reasonable to expect. I think this is a reasonable thing to expect. Nobody was going to chain people to the keyboard while Brendan Eich was loitering in the room, aggressively existing at them while they worked. The question is, if one person cannot work with another, who is being unreasonable? Who should be forced to yield? In other words, is there a right to not be made uncomfortable by somebody's mere belief, no matter how vile, that supersedes the expectation of workplace civility? I do not believe in such a right - conversely, I believe that there is a duty of tolerance in the workplace; tolerance as a behavior, not as a state of mind. (Though, that said, I think Mozilla is far more symptom than cause.)

buscoquadnary 4y ago

Let's be clear here, he merely believes that marriage should be between a man and a woman. Not that he advocates for a gay pogrom, or that they should be deprived of due process or anything. This type of hyperbole is just as bad as calling him a Nazi.