21–30 of 57 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The salient excerpt: > while they described the skits as typically a “roast,” they emphasized that “the goal is not to offend.” Really just seems like some more character assassination by Gizmodo.
If the administration of Harvard felt they needed to formally apologize it seems unlikely Gizmodo just gined this up out of nothing.
FTA: > Damore said: "I went to a diversity programme at Google, it was ... not recorded, totally secretive. I heard things that I definitely disagreed with in some of our programmes. I had some discussions there, there was lots of just shaming, and 'No you can’t say that, that's sexist' and 'You can't do this.' That is, he took a bland corporate diversity training class and tried starting fights. The tell here is "yo…
>if you tell your diversity class that women aren't cut out for work at Google, you're going to cause a fight When did he ever say that?
[1] Yes, it was. Don't pretend that it wasn't. If he genuinely felt that women and minorities were just as valuable candidates why did he write 10 pages about why efforts to ensure their inclusion were hurting google? The fact that he framed the argument creatively doesn't change the fact that fundamentally he feels Google is hiring too many women, thus the diatribe.
FTA: > Damore said: "I went to a diversity programme at Google, it was ... not recorded, totally secretive. I heard things that I definitely disagreed with in some of our programmes. I had some discussions there, there was lots of just shaming, and 'No you can’t say that, that's sexist' and 'You can't do this.' That is, he took a bland corporate diversity training class and tried starting fights. The tell here is "yo…
I can't think of a better place to legitimize your argument than alt-right YouTube.
FTA: > Damore said: "I went to a diversity programme at Google, it was ... not recorded, totally secretive. I heard things that I definitely disagreed with in some of our programmes. I had some discussions there, there was lots of just shaming, and 'No you can’t say that, that's sexist' and 'You can't do this.' That is, he took a bland corporate diversity training class and tried starting fights. The tell here is "yo…
Not bland if it offended him enough to prompt his memo.
> The tell here is "you can't say that" with no antecedent for "that". Yeah: if you tell your diversity class that women aren't cut out for work at Google, you're going to cause a fight.
There is no evidence at all that he said anything like that during a diversity class. The only evidence we have is his memo. Which doesn't say women aren't cut out for work at Google. Thanks for playing.
FTA: > Damore said: "I went to a diversity programme at Google, it was ... not recorded, totally secretive. I heard things that I definitely disagreed with in some of our programmes. I had some discussions there, there was lots of just shaming, and 'No you can’t say that, that's sexist' and 'You can't do this.' That is, he took a bland corporate diversity training class and tried starting fights. The tell here is "yo…
We are so prone to evaluating messages based on their form. If someone is ranting and cursing and shouting, we fundamentally assume that they're irrational. If someone speaks calmly and clearly and uses objective wording we assume that they're rational.
We read this statement, see "there was lots of just shaming," and our immediate natural reaction is to think, "Well that sucks, Google shouldn't shame people, this guy is being persecuted."
But that's not the information actually presented here. All this statement tells us is that this guy felt shamed. Was that because the people were actually shaming him? Or was it because they stated facts that this guy feels shamed by? Or something else? We have no idea.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> more ... assassination You can't kill something that's dead.
James Damore has shown an amazing strength of character and is a hero for doing what he did.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>if you tell your diversity class that women aren't cut out for work at Google, you're going to cause a fight When did he ever say that?
It was the thesis of his viral letter[1]. I'm simply supposing that he tried out the same argument in an informal context first, and that's what he's complaining about here. [1] Yes, it was. Don't pretend that it wasn't. If he genuinely felt that women and minorities were just as valuable candidates why did he write 10 pages about why efforts to ensure their inclusion were hurting google? The fact that he framed the…
This article is scant on details about what happened in the workshop.