4 ms·

Google did nothing about Israeli co-workers at Google sending me messages such as "Do you support Hamas?" They targeted me because I +1ed a memegen post mournin

Google did nothing about Israeli co-workers at Google sending me messages such as "Do you support Hamas?" They targeted me because I +1ed a memegen post mourning civilians who have died in Gaza. I'll even explicitly say this: They were on the search experience team. Multiple of them were also managers. (Both Engineer Managers and Hiring Managers)

racional 3y ago
Very helpful to know. It shouldn't matter that the people doing this are Israeli, though. Either way, let's hear more reports from other Googlers, please.
- octopoc 3y ago
  > It shouldn't matter that the people doing this are Israeli, though. Why not? It certainly seems relevant to me.
  - racional 3y ago
    "The content of their character, not the color of their skin (or passport)" per the famous saying.
    - octopoc 3y ago
      I think what aaomidi was saying was that their Israeli coworkers conflated mourning murdered Palestinian civilians with supporting terrorists.
      - racional 3y ago
        Right, and that was understood already. The point I'm making is that (apart from that information) they were drawing unnecessary attention to the coworkers' nationality.
        octopoc 3y ago
        Their nationality is relevant because they are Israeli and Israel and Gaza are at war.
        racional 3y ago
        Profoundly disagree. Perhaps in rhetorical or philosophical contexts it may be relevant. But concerning questions of what constitutes acceptable workplace conduct, it is way off the page (and in my view, completely out of line).
        octopoc 3y ago
        Eh I get it. TBH I think this is a generational divide and we’ll have to agree to disagree.
        aaomidi 3y ago
        It was relevant because it might explain Google's hesitancy to react to it.
        racional 3y ago
        Yes, it can certainly be relevant on that and other contextual grounds. It's also where things drift into realm of speculation, away from what we know from the facts at hand. All I've been saying (which I thought was obvious) was: when considering whether the actions of these people (who sent the "Do you support Hamas?" emails) -- as individuals -- constitute a form of intimidation (and it seems obvious that they do; and from what you said, apparently sanctioned by their higher-ups, no less) -- One has to keep their personal attributes out of the discussion. That's just how the legal and ethical standards for these things work. Again, thanks for the disclosure. It definitely sounds quite creepy. Especially considering the apparent lack of action taken by the higher-ups.

racional 3y ago

Very helpful to know. It shouldn't matter that the people doing this are Israeli, though. Either way, let's hear more reports from other Googlers, please.

octopoc 3y ago
> It shouldn't matter that the people doing this are Israeli, though. Why not? It certainly seems relevant to me.
- racional 3y ago
  "The content of their character, not the color of their skin (or passport)" per the famous saying.
  - octopoc 3y ago
    I think what aaomidi was saying was that their Israeli coworkers conflated mourning murdered Palestinian civilians with supporting terrorists.
    - racional 3y ago
      Right, and that was understood already. The point I'm making is that (apart from that information) they were drawing unnecessary attention to the coworkers' nationality.
      - octopoc 3y ago
        Their nationality is relevant because they are Israeli and Israel and Gaza are at war.
        racional 3y ago
        Profoundly disagree. Perhaps in rhetorical or philosophical contexts it may be relevant. But concerning questions of what constitutes acceptable workplace conduct, it is way off the page (and in my view, completely out of line).
        octopoc 3y ago
        Eh I get it. TBH I think this is a generational divide and we’ll have to agree to disagree.
        aaomidi 3y ago
        It was relevant because it might explain Google's hesitancy to react to it.
        racional 3y ago
        Yes, it can certainly be relevant on that and other contextual grounds. It's also where things drift into realm of speculation, away from what we know from the facts at hand. All I've been saying (which I thought was obvious) was: when considering whether the actions of these people (who sent the "Do you support Hamas?" emails) -- as individuals -- constitute a form of intimidation (and it seems obvious that they do; and from what you said, apparently sanctioned by their higher-ups, no less) -- One has to keep their personal attributes out of the discussion. That's just how the legal and ethical standards for these things work. Again, thanks for the disclosure. It definitely sounds quite creepy. Especially considering the apparent lack of action taken by the higher-ups.