4 ms·
It's insane to me that the automatic conclusion from the above is that organisation B is racist.
by gambiting 4y ago
It's insane to me that the automatic conclusion from the above is that organisation B is racist.
- 31337Logic 4y ago...or that Org A is "less racist", as I've demonstrated. Poor analogy by the OP.
- aidenn0 4y agoYou just went from "Org B likely has some issues" to "automatic conclusion."
- gambiting 4y agoNo, I actually went off the first sentence: "So which report makes an organization less racist" So that implies that org B is more racist(because it hired zero brown people) - is that not the conclusion the author of the comment wants us to reach?
- TylerE 4y agoYou roll a die 120 times, get 20 1's, 20 2's, 0 3's, 20 4's, 40 5's, and 20 6's. Do you or do you not think it is incredibly likely this is an unfair die. That's Company B.
- gambiting 4y agoIf your company takes a pile of CVs and randomly picks a bunch of people to hire, then yes, you are absolutely correct, there is something very very wrong with company B if a truly random process results in an unequal distribution of hires. But hiring isn't random. Maybe all the "brown" candidates lacked necessary qualifications. Or needed visas which they couldn't get. Or a million other reasons other than "org B is racist". My point is: you need further context. To look at that one stat as given above and conclude org B is racist is....unwise.
- MockObject 4y agoThis is a very inappropriate analogy, because humans are very diverse; the exact opposite of a die's faces.
- TylerE 4y agoWe’re not discussing f a human. We’re talking about fairly coarse demographic buckets
- brianwawok 4y agoIs that how you hire? You litearlly roll a dice for an interview? No bias of "This guy looks / acts / talks like me?" I am not sure I have ever been on a team without some kind of like-me bias. It's real hard.