Fired Google Engineer Loses Diversity Memo Challenge - Sensationalist Headlines

[QUOTE=Lambeth;53139334]It's more that google can't really crack down on someone who no longer works there[/QUOTE] Well, I think the issue is that they didn't do anything about it when it was still relevant.

[QUOTE=Lambeth;53139286]I googled around and this woman appears to have left google in 2016, long before damore even wrote his memo.[/QUOTE] The class-action lawsuit takes more than Damore and his memo into consideration [url]https://www.scribd.com/document/368688363/James-Damore-vs-Google-Class-Action-Lawsuit[/url] [quote]Plaintiffs bring this individual and class action on behalf of themselves and on behalf of a class and subclasses defined as all employees of Google discriminated against (i) due to their perceived conservative political views by Google in California at any time during the time period beginning four years prior to the filing of this Complaint through the date of trial in this action (“Political Class Period”)[/quote]

[QUOTE=Reshy;53139243]Now, I don't care about how accurate or not the memo is, but I don't think selective enforcement of company policy is ethical.[/QUOTE] As far as I know, none of the other google employees spread a memo around that resulted in internal instability and international media backlash, so the treatment seems pretty even.

I'm not sure how you could write a memo implying that 20% of your coworkers are diversity hires that were the result of "lowering the bar", and not expect to be fired.

[QUOTE=Wowza!;53139436]I'm not sure how you could write a memo implying that 20% of your coworkers are diversity hires that were the result of "lowering the bar", and not expect to be fired.[/QUOTE] From an earlier article: [QUOTE=Lambeth;53039256]Damore is joined in his suit by David Gudeman, a former Google employee who was fired in December 2016. Gudeman used an internal forum to question a Muslim co-worker's account of being targeted by the FBI on the basis of his religion and suggested that the FBI had legitimate reasons to investigate the co-worker.[/QUOTE] I don't see how they could lose this case.

[QUOTE=Paramud;53139401]As far as I know, none of the other google employees spread a memo around that resulted in internal instability and international media backlash, so the treatment seems pretty even.[/QUOTE] Funny cause it was another google employee that actually spread the memo, not Damore.

[QUOTE=Cliff2;53139589]Funny cause it was another google employee that actually spread the memo, not Damore.[/QUOTE] Not really, he was the one that posted it on the forum. It wouldn't have spread if he had only sent it to the HR reps.

I feel like a lot of people haven't actually read the memo or the facts of the case before forming and sharing their opinions, which is honestly fairly strange to me. The fact of the matter is that if liberal folks are allowed to be open about their political leanings and post political content to company message boards and conservative people aren't... well, that kind of validates his claims of being discriminated against, doesn't it? I'm not sure what else you could call it.

[QUOTE=phygon;53139627]I feel like a lot of people haven't actually read the memo or the facts of the case before forming and sharing their opinions, which is honestly fairly strange to me. The fact of the matter is that if liberal folks are allowed to be open about their political leanings and post political content to company message boards and conservative people aren't... well, that kind of validates his claims of being discriminated against, doesn't it? I'm not sure what else you could call it.[/QUOTE] There's a difference between sharing opinions and issuing a memo to the whole company about how the women and minorities you work alongside didn't [I]earn[/I] their positions.

[QUOTE=bitches;53139665]There's a difference between sharing opinions and issuing a memo to the whole company about how the women and minorities you work alongside didn't [I]earn[/I] their positions.[/QUOTE] But he didn't issue it

[QUOTE=bitches;53139665]There's a difference between sharing opinions and issuing a memo to the whole company about [b]how the women and minorities you work alongside didn't [I]earn[/I] their positions.[/b][/QUOTE] No where in his memo did he ever say this, and he actually did the exact opposite by suggesting how to more effectively get women in the Tech Industry. [quote=James Damore]"I hope it’s clear that I’m not saying that diversity is bad, that Google or society is 100% fair, that we shouldn’t try to correct for existing biases, or that minorities have the same experience of those in the majority. My larger point is that we have an intolerance for ideas and evidence that don’t fit a certain ideology. I’m also not saying that we should restrict people to certain gender roles; I’m advocating for quite the opposite: treat people as individuals, not as just another member of their group (tribalism)."[/quote] Just mind-boggling how much people are drawing conclusions probably from blog-articles for their opinion on this.

[QUOTE=Tudd;53139679]No where in his memo did he ever say this, and he actually did the exact opposite by suggesting how to more effectively get women in the Tech Industry.[/QUOTE] Is it so extraordinary that a company as desired by engineers as Google would have enough female applicants as talented as the male applicants to fill any number of positions? What are you suggesting Google has done wrong here?

[QUOTE=bitches;53139665]There's a difference between sharing opinions and issuing a memo to the whole company about how the women and minorities you work alongside didn't [I]earn[/I] their positions.[/QUOTE] That's just, well, wrong, but let's assume that it isn't. How is that different than posting articles bitching about white men and how you should avoid things that they make to the same message board? The typical message that goes along with that rhetoric is "white men don't have to work hard to achieve".

[QUOTE=bitches;53139690]Is it so extraordinary that a company as desired by engineers as Google would have enough female applicants as talented as the male applicants to fill any number of positions? What are you suggesting Google has done wrong here?[/QUOTE] Maybe you could read the memo since you obviously haven't. It addresses this question in a multifactored way; Even though it is more of a suggestion for a more effective approach to diversity then accusing Google of completely failing.

[QUOTE=Tudd;53139692]Maybe you could read the memo since you obviously haven't. It addresses this question in a multifactored way.[/QUOTE] it's almost as if i read the whole thing to make my post on the previous page maybe you could construct a response to my question?

[QUOTE=bitches;53139690]Is it so extraordinary that a company as desired by engineers as Google would have enough female applicants as talented as the male applicants to fill any number of positions?[/QUOTE] Yes, it is absolutely quite literally unbelievable that they have the same volume of men and women at the same talent level applying [IMG]https://i.imgur.com/0I56GTv.png[/IMG]

[QUOTE=phygon;53139691]That's just, well, wrong, but let's assume that it isn't. How is that different than posting articles bitching about white men and how you should avoid things that they make to the same message board? The typical message that goes along with that rhetoric is "white men don't have to work hard to achieve".[/QUOTE] i'm not interested in arguing whataboutism if anyone else did anything wrong they too should face consequences, but that has no bearing on calling out one's company for hiring too many people he implies didn't deserve their jobs

[QUOTE=bitches;53139698]it's almost as if i read the whole thing to make my post on the previous page maybe you could construct a response to my question?[/QUOTE] There is difference of reading it and you obviously cherry-picking bits like you did in that post. Please prove that James Damore ever said anything regarding what you accused him of saying: [quote=bitches]how the women and minorities you work alongside didn't earn their positions. [/quote] This line you stated here heavily indicates you didn't actually [i]read[/i] the memo and its points.

[QUOTE=phygon;53139699]Yes, it is absolutely quite literally unbelievable that they have the same volume of men and women at the same talent level applying [IMG]https://i.imgur.com/0I56GTv.png[/IMG][/QUOTE] google has a finite number of employees to hire for its engineering positions one of the most desirable places in the world for an engineer to work surely draws enough talented female applicants to fill ALL of its positions if they so chose so what is your point? i'm not arguing about the industry as a whole here are you saying that google has hired women less qualified than male applicants just because they were women? [editline]17th February 2018[/editline] [QUOTE=Tudd;53139707]There is difference of reading it and you obviously cherry-picking bits like you did in that post. Please prove that James Damore ever said anything regarding what you accused him of saying: This line you stated here heavily indicates you didn't actually [i]read[/i] the memo and its points.[/QUOTE] his claim is that google uses discriminatory hiring practices instead of what he believes would be genuine efforts to attract more women to the company this cannot be separated from the implicit claim that google has turned down male applicants who had more talent than the women hired instead

[QUOTE=bitches;53139710] his claim is that google uses discriminatory hiring practices instead of what he believes would be genuine efforts to attract more women to the company[/QUOTE] How is that, " women and minorities you work alongside didn't earn their positions?" as you proclaimed. He never stated at any point he felt like the people he worked with didn't earn their positions and only stated what he thought was a more effective approach to diversity.

[QUOTE=bitches;53139710]google has a finite number of employees to hire for its engineering positions one of the most desirable places in the world for an engineer to work surely draws enough talented female applicants to fill ALL of its positions if they so chose so what is your point? i'm not arguing about the industry as a whole here are you saying that google has hired women less qualified than male applicants just because they were women?[/QUOTE] Statistically that's how it seems to be panning out. If you were hiring nothing but the top talent and approximately 80% of the people in the field were male, it would make sense that roughly 80% of your chosen candidates would be male. It definitely wouldn't dip to 50%, at the very least.

[QUOTE=bitches;53138264]The memo uses mature discussion that anyone would agree with as a veil against his interspersed goal of causing unrest in the workplace for the advancement of conservative values. He released it as a highly publicized smear piece for the public eye rather than a genuine effort to balance social values by having dialogue in-company. He gets to play victim knowing the shitstorm it would cause, and his resultant firing. Conservatives are better employees. The Left is overly sensitive, Politically Correct, and violent. The Left are communists and communism is a failure, but since they failed they decided to take over our genders. Truly the work of a stable employee who just wants the best for Google.[/QUOTE] Way to ignore alot of the preface for why he explores these ideas. When you cherry-pick and cut away context, you are strawmanning his argument beyond recognition. You claiming he only wants the advancement of conservative values, and released it as a public "smear piece" (even though it was someone else who leaked it) is just dead wrong and ignores how this circulated to the public and its intention. [quote=James Damore][b]Neither side is 100% correct and both viewpoints are necessary for a functioning society[/b] or, in this case, company. A company too far to the right may be slow to react, overly hierarchical, and untrusting of others. In contrast, a company too far to the left will constantly be changing (deprecating much loved services), over diversify its interests (ignoring or being ashamed of its core business), and overly trust its employees and competitors. [/quote]

[QUOTE=Tudd;53139720]How is that, " women and minorities you work alongside didn't earn their positions?" as you proclaimed. He never stated at any point he felt like the people he worked with didn't earn their positions and only stated what he thought was a more effective approach to diversity.[/QUOTE] It's implicit. It implies that the reason they weren't hired wasn't because they didn't have the best skillset, but because they were a diversity hire. I refuse to believe you aren't being intentionally obtuse about this.

[QUOTE=phygon;53139723]Statistically that's how it seems to be panning out. If you were hiring nothing but the top talent and approximately 80% of the people in the field were male, it would make sense that roughly 80% of your chosen candidates would be male. It definitely wouldn't dip to 50%, at the very least.[/QUOTE] Let's say you have 10 new positions. You've got 800 men and 200 women looking to be hired, and 20% of applicants are what Google thinks of as high quality. Now you've got 160 men and 40 women looking to get hired, but only 10 people get in. Are you claiming that it would be discriminatory if Google didn't hire 8 men and 2 women?

[QUOTE=Raidyr;53139753]It's implicit. It implies that the reason they weren't hired wasn't because they didn't have the best skillset, but because they were a diversity hire. I refuse to believe you aren't being intentionally obtuse about this.[/QUOTE] But even with that conjecture; At no point does James Damore suggest these people be fired or call any of them out. Obviously if you are arguing between a Quota system vs Meritocracy there is implicit knowledge the quota system is probably ignoring more effective people for other reasons, but at no point is James Damore saying his current colleagues need to be ousted or reconsidered. And thus Bitche's statement is just wrong. The point of the memo is more of a suggestion on what methods in the future Google should consider for a more effective closing of the gender gap. Not a hit piece on his current co-workers.

[QUOTE=Tudd;53139761]But even with that conjecture; At no point does James Damore suggest these people be fired or call any of them out. Obviously if you are arguing between a Quota system vs Meritocracy there is implicit knowledge the quota system is probably ignoring more effective people for other reasons, but at no point is James Damore saying his current colleagues need to be ousted or reconsidered. And thus Bitche's statement is just wrong. The point of the memo is more of a suggestion on what methods in the future Google should consider for a more effective closing of the gender gap. Not a hit piece on his current co-workers.[/QUOTE] This ignores the sheer volume of talented applicants a company like Google attracts.

[QUOTE=Tudd;53139761]But even with that conjecture; At no point does James Damore suggest these people be fired or call any of them out. Obviously if you are arguing between a Quota system vs Meritocracy there is implicit knowledge the quota system isn't hiring the best people, but at no point is James Damore saying his current colleagues need to be ousted or reconsidered. And thus Bitche's statement is just wrong.[/QUOTE] Yes he doesn't say it outright we have already been acknowledging that for several posts now that's why I described it as [U][B]implicit[/B][/U]. If says the diversity hiring practices at Google are flawed and there are people in his workplace that might be classified as diversity hires (whether it be their coworkers [I]or the hires themselves) [/I]the implication is that they didn't get that job because they are good at what they do, but because Google needed a woman or a Muslim that month. That he doesn't say it outright doesn't mean it can't erode morale or cause an HR issue down the line if he is ever in a position of management or responsibility. If I wrote a memo like that, spread it around an internal message service that lead it to being leaked and becoming national headlines I'd be terminated the next day, and we wouldn't be having a discussion about how ethical my firing was because I'm not lucky enough to live in the state of California. [editline]17th February 2018[/editline] [QUOTE=Tudd;53139761] The point of the memo is more of a suggestion on what methods in the future Google should consider for a more effective closing of the gender gap. Not a hit piece on his current co-workers.[/QUOTE] It explicitly criticizes Google's hiring practices and implicitly throws coworkers under the bus. You seem to be under the impression that nobody read this memo in the 6 months this shits been going on but it really seems like you only caught the last two pages of it.

[QUOTE=bitches;53139769]This ignores the sheer volume of talented applicants a company like Google attracts.[/QUOTE] This isn't an argument to my points. At no point is James Damore or I saying Google isn't employing talented individuals. He is suggesting a different method to closing the gender gap and critiquing Google's Biases so it can be a more conductive environment. You need to provide evidence for the baseless statements I have called out and that you keep sidestepping.

[QUOTE=Tudd;53139786]This isn't an argument to my points. At no point is James Damore or I saying Google isn't employing talented individuals. [B]He is suggesting a different method to closing the gender gap[/B] and critiquing Google's Biases so it can be a more conductive environment. You need to provide evidence for the baseless statements I have called out and that you keep sidestepping.[/QUOTE] A method different to the supposedly discriminatory practice of increasing minority representation amongst equally-skilled candidates? He complains over and over throughout the memo that Google's hiring practices are bad for their business. What would [I]you[/I] describe their current hiring practices as?

[QUOTE=Tudd;53139786]This isn't an argument to my points. At no point is James Damore or I saying Google isn't employing talented individuals. [/QUOTE] [QUOTE]... A high priority queue and special treatment for “diversity” candidates Hiring practices which can effectively lower the bar for “diversity” candidates by decreasing the false negative rate Reconsidering any set of people if it’s not “diverse” enough, but not showing that same scrutiny in the reverse direction (clear confirmation bias) ... [/QUOTE] page 6, under "The harm of Googles biases".