4 ms·

> wow.. our society really has a tendency to overcorrect regarding social issues I don't agree. You're reacting to a one-sided, very partial critique of a poli

> wow.. our society really has a tendency to overcorrect regarding social issues I don't agree. You're reacting to a one-sided, very partial critique of a policy change that no longer benefitted a specific group and the only tradeoff was a hypothetical and subjective drop of the hiring bar. This complain can also be equally dismissed as members of the privileged group complaining over the loss of privilege. The article is very blunt in the way their framed the problem: the in-group felt entitled to a job they felt was assured to them, but once the rules changed to have them compete on equal footing for the same position... That's suddenly a problem. To make matters worse, this blend of easily arguable nitpicking is being used to kill any action or initiative that jeopardizes the best interests of privileged groups. Also, it should be stressed that this pitchfork drive against discriminate hiring practices is heard because these privileged groups believe their loss of privilege is a major injustice. In the meantime, society as a whole seemed to have muted any concern voiced by any persecuted and underprivileged group for not even having the chance of having a shot at these opportunities. Where's the outrage there?

Manuel_D 2y ago
The undisputed facts at hand are: * The FAA introduced a bigraphical questionnaire which screened out 90% of applicants. * The answers to this questionnaire were distributed to members of the National Black Coalition of Federal Aviation Employees. * Members were explicitly told not to distribute the answers to other people, to reduce competition for admission. This is as bad a scandal as though the answers to the SAT were leaked.
- motorest 2y ago
  > I'm... totally at a loss as to you you can get this takeaway from this piece. The undisputed facts at hand are: This is exactly the kind of one-sided nitpicking I pointed out. You purposely decided to omit the fact that the "biological questionaire" was in fact a change in the way applicants were evaluated, which eliminated the privilege of an in-group to avoid to compete with "walk-ons", i.e., anyone outside of the privileged group. At best you're trying to dismiss the sheer existence of such an evaluation process by putting up strawmen over the implementation of this evaluation.
  - cakealert 2y ago
    [flagged]
    - motorest 2y ago
      [flagged]
      - cakealert 2y ago
        > You purposely decided to omit the fact that the "biological questionaire" was in fact a change in the way applicants were evaluated > * The FAA introduced a bigraphical questionnaire which screened out 90% of applicants. ??? > which eliminated the privilege of an in-group to avoid to compete with "walk-ons", i.e., anyone outside of the privileged group > The answers to this questionnaire were distributed to members of the National Black Coalition of Federal Aviation Employees. ??????
  - LightHugger 2y ago
    Is "eliminated the privilege of" some kind of dogwhistle for being racist against white people? You're intentionally using circuitous language but that appears to be the message. People are individual human beings, discrimination on the basis of skin color is evil. Not sure why this is so hard to understand for some people.
    - theossuary 2y ago
      [flagged]
      - Manuel_D 2y ago
        But "having their privilege taken away" is a vastly different thing than "answers to a multiple choice test are leaked to an ethnic affinity group". Furthermore, this also negatives impacted Latin and Asian people. And also Black people that weren't part of the aforementioned affinity group.
arkh 2y ago
> equal footing So, the candidates who were not members of some racially based association also got access to the answers to the first test?
Duwensatzaj 2y ago
> once the rules changed to have them compete on equal footing for the same position... That's suddenly a problem. It wasn’t on equal footing, so your entire post is based on either a misunderstanding or you’re just blatantly trolling in which case well done, I totally bit.

Manuel_D 2y ago

The undisputed facts at hand are: * The FAA introduced a bigraphical questionnaire which screened out 90% of applicants. * The answers to this questionnaire were distributed to members of the National Black Coalition of Federal Aviation Employees. * Members were explicitly told not to distribute the answers to other people, to reduce competition for admission. This is as bad a scandal as though the answers to the SAT were leaked.

motorest 2y ago
> I'm... totally at a loss as to you you can get this takeaway from this piece. The undisputed facts at hand are: This is exactly the kind of one-sided nitpicking I pointed out. You purposely decided to omit the fact that the "biological questionaire" was in fact a change in the way applicants were evaluated, which eliminated the privilege of an in-group to avoid to compete with "walk-ons", i.e., anyone outside of the privileged group. At best you're trying to dismiss the sheer existence of such an evaluation process by putting up strawmen over the implementation of this evaluation.
- cakealert 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - motorest 2y ago
    [flagged]
    - cakealert 2y ago
      > You purposely decided to omit the fact that the "biological questionaire" was in fact a change in the way applicants were evaluated > * The FAA introduced a bigraphical questionnaire which screened out 90% of applicants. ??? > which eliminated the privilege of an in-group to avoid to compete with "walk-ons", i.e., anyone outside of the privileged group > The answers to this questionnaire were distributed to members of the National Black Coalition of Federal Aviation Employees. ??????
- LightHugger 2y ago
  Is "eliminated the privilege of" some kind of dogwhistle for being racist against white people? You're intentionally using circuitous language but that appears to be the message. People are individual human beings, discrimination on the basis of skin color is evil. Not sure why this is so hard to understand for some people.
  - theossuary 2y ago
    [flagged]
    - Manuel_D 2y ago
      But "having their privilege taken away" is a vastly different thing than "answers to a multiple choice test are leaked to an ethnic affinity group". Furthermore, this also negatives impacted Latin and Asian people. And also Black people that weren't part of the aforementioned affinity group.

arkh 2y ago

> equal footing So, the candidates who were not members of some racially based association also got access to the answers to the first test?

Duwensatzaj 2y ago

> once the rules changed to have them compete on equal footing for the same position... That's suddenly a problem. It wasn’t on equal footing, so your entire post is based on either a misunderstanding or you’re just blatantly trolling in which case well done, I totally bit.