Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Resignation Letter

bariweiss.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

531–540 of 716 posts

Re: Resignation Letter

#531

Post by iateanapple »

some-guy wrote: post #525
iateanapple wrote: post #509

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Am I a McCarthyist for rejecting him outright without hesitation? Yes. Why can’t he have an opposing view from you on immigration? I was on a visa and could still see the h1b program was being abused. We often have less than ideal experiences with other cultural groups. That’s normal. Is your work culture toxic because of your visa holders? Would you refuse to hire feminist women because you had a mostly male team?

McCarthy was a senator in high levels of government. When I consider who I'm employing to be around the people around me, I expect them to be judged on their merits of the job, not their country of origin or visa status. You can criticize H1B programs and their abuse, but saying there are too many Chinese and Indians explicitly and rejecting them for that is not "McCarthyism".

> I expect them to be judged on their merits of the job, not their country of origin or visa status.

So do I and so do the vast majority of people who want less immigration.

> and rejecting them for that is not "McCarthyism".

To be fair to the parent - it would be if you tried to make sure they weren’t hired anywhere.

You were making a biased and snap judgement about a candidate - but that happens a lot in the interview process - same as if you rejected an African American candidate because you didn’t think they would fit in.

What would you do if one of your existing employees was found to have that kind of twitter account?

Re: Resignation Letter

#532

Post by AnimalMuppet »

throwaway894345 wrote: post #515
AnimalMuppet wrote: post #306

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are plenty of us who think that the "Paradox of Tolerance" is mistaken, rather than truth. It may sound reasonable, but it is used in practice to define ideas we don't like as intolerant, and then exclude those who hold those ideas. If you look around, those on the left aren't showing themselves to be paragons of tolerance. They are nearly as narrow-minded as the right, just with different in-groups and out-gro…

I agree with all of this, but I will pick a nit here: > There are plenty of us who think that the "Paradox of Tolerance" is mistaken, rather than truth. It may sound reasonable, but it is used in practice to define ideas we don't like as intolerant, and then exclude those who hold those ideas. If they've changed the definition of "tolerance" to proxy their ingroup, are they actually talking about the Paradox of Toler…

You could argue that they're not actually talking about the Paradox of Tolerance. (See philwelch's comment for what the real Paradox of Tolerance is, according to Popper.) You could even argue that they're not actually talking about the Paradox of Tolerance as defined by themselves. But at that point, the Paradox of Tolerance becomes useless, because whether it's being applied correctly or wrongly depends on the honesty and correct judgment of the one applying it. And it's really tempting to use it without honesty or correct judgment, all the while claiming that your side is the good guys.

Re: Resignation Letter

#533

Post by TechBro8615 »

chroma wrote: post #504
some-guy wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was interviewing a candidate last year for a software engineering position. Interview was fine and he was capable. I decided to find him on Twitter. He said immigration was ruining the country, and that there are too many Indians / Chinese in the Bay Area. About half of my organization either have an H1B visa or a green card. Am I a McCarthyist for rejecting him outright without hesitation?

A while ago I interviewed a candidate for a software engineering position. He seemed quite capable. I decided to find him on Twitter. His feed was full of things like, "All Cops Are Bastards", many images of the hammer & sickle, and generally hating on white people. He even retweeted an illustration of the White House burning with a hammer & sickle flag being raised in front of it along with the caption "my 2020 goal…

FWIW, I would not hire this person. I personally lean right, but I will not hire anyone who posts their political opinions publicly, whether left or right. IMO it shows poor judgement and that you will likely be an unproductive employee, concerned instead about things that have little effect on your life at work.

Re: Resignation Letter

#534

Post by stale2002 »

chasing wrote: post #274
throwaway894345 wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lots of people are offended every day and they don't coalesce into slanderous mobs who demand the offender's termination. Further, these largely ignored offenses are generally much more overt than "accidentally making an 'ok' sign", "interviewing a black man who wishes there was more focus on violence in his community", "citing a prominent black researcher", "opening an Asian restaurant", "wearing a Chinese-inspired…

"coalesce into slanderous mobs" Now, of course "the mob" can get things wrong. We see it all the time — and it's not a progressive or "cancel culture" thing specifically. It's just a side effect of these very rapid and short-burst communication platforms that many people use these days. And I'd frankly argue that the fact that bad information is so easy spread has been used to very harmful effect not by progressives…

> But that doesn't mean it's wrong

People aren't just expressing their opinion. Instead a whole bunch of people are engaging in actual illegal harassment, when these mobs start up.

No, I am not talking about criticism. I am talking about the actual harassment that often comes out of these mobs. Harassment such as death threats to you, your friends and your family, and the like, all because someone said something dumb on twitter or whatever.

Re: Resignation Letter

#535

Post by some-guy »

iateanapple wrote: post #531
some-guy wrote: post #525

Earlier quoted context omitted.

McCarthy was a senator in high levels of government. When I consider who I'm employing to be around the people around me, I expect them to be judged on their merits of the job, not their country of origin or visa status. You can criticize H1B programs and their abuse, but saying there are too many Chinese and Indians explicitly and rejecting them for that is not "McCarthyism".

> I expect them to be judged on their merits of the job, not their country of origin or visa status. So do I and so do the vast majority of people who want less immigration. > and rejecting them for that is not "McCarthyism". To be fair to the parent - it would be if you tried to make sure they weren’t hired anywhere. You were making a biased and snap judgement about a candidate - but that happens a lot in the interv…

As I said: they _literally_ said, "There are too many Chinese and Indians" in the Bay Area. That's a no go.

That is not the same as having subjective internal biases about an African American candidate.

Re: Resignation Letter

#536

Post by jcstauffer »

AnimalMuppet wrote: post #196
jcstauffer wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Note that "hostile work environment" is a legal term related to a pattern of behavior taken to intimidate someone based on a protected trait (e.g., age, sex, religion, race, disability, etc.). Notedly, political viewpoints are not a protected trait.

Does it have to be a protected trait? If someone (or several someones) decide they dislike me because, say, I'm ugly and they're just tired of seeing my face, and they start saying that I need to be fired, and putting ax icons next to my name, and going on Twitter to tell everyone how ugly I am and how it ruins their appetite for lunch when I walk into the breakroom, is that not a "hostile work environment" just beca…

It may be a good idea to fire someone who participates in that behavior, but there isn’t a legal obligation to do so (IANAL).

If the behavior is because of your race and they aren’t fired, you can (successfully) sue your employer. That’s the difference.

In her letter, she asserts that behavior that fits the first scenario is illegal- it’s not.

Re: Resignation Letter

#537

Post by some-guy »

umeshunni wrote: post #389
some-guy wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was interviewing a candidate last year for a software engineering position. Interview was fine and he was capable. I decided to find him on Twitter. He said immigration was ruining the country, and that there are too many Indians / Chinese in the Bay Area. About half of my organization either have an H1B visa or a green card. Am I a McCarthyist for rejecting him outright without hesitation?

Would you have done the same if he said there were too many White people in the Bay Area?

Yes, because they explicitly called out race / national origin.

You cannot say "there are too many (X) in the Bay Area". Period, I will not hire you.

Re: Resignation Letter

#538

Post by mnm1 »

This idea that a newspaper should report on all opinions as equal is beyond ludicrous. The idea that all opinions are equal is incredibly stupid and harmful to society and its members. Not all opinions are equal. Some are worthy of being reported, some are not. Some are well thought out, by educated people, who actually want to arrive at a reasonable opinion, while others are completely illogical nonsense, created out of hate or spite. In this particular case, the NYT can make a compelling case that Cotton's opinion was the latter. It's not unreasonable for them to not want to publish it. It's not censorship either. There are plenty, less reputable newspapers that publish such garbage.

For some reason, people think this "two-sideism" is balanced, fair reporting. That couldn't be further from the truth. Presenting flat earth rantings alongside scientific data showing the earth is round is neither balanced nor fair. It's just nonsense. It removes any signal that exists and brings into question the mental capability of the reporter who thought that such things should be presented in an equal light. The same can be said in this and many other cases, especially when dealing with the president's insane ramblings. Newspapers, if they strive to provide news and not just ad revenue, should be making it clear when the opinions provided by the people they interview are batshit crazy bordering on insane. When Cotton suggests bringing in the army or Trump suggests drinking bleach, those suggestions should be published with a heavy dose of skepticism and context clearly marking them as hateful or wrong. It seems Weiss wants to shirk those duties and just provide readers with a bunch of nonsense that masquerades as a thoughful opinion but is nothing but a hate drive call to violence.

Re: Resignation Letter

#539

Post by Rick1 »

shuntress wrote: post #280
uncoder0 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Whats worse is this phenomenon isn't contained to the NYT all media it appears is infected.

It is somewhat alarming to see this hostile and dehumanizing language (referring to "all media" as "infected") and makes me automatically skeptical of your point-of-view.

This is a well phrased variant of: "since they're critical, they must be wrong".

Re: Resignation Letter

#540

Post by seibelj »

minikites wrote: post #506
seibelj wrote: post #333

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The rioters were already burning buildings and looting stores. That is why Tom Cotton proposed sending in the military. It was fighting violence with violence. Again, I disagree with sending in the military, but preventing the progressive readership of the NYT from hearing about an opinion that 58% of Americans hold is simply coddling them and keeping them away from bad thoughts. We need an informed citizenry, not on…

>This is why I support publishing such an op-ed despite disagreeing with it. It allows us to debate and attack the idea, without letting it fester and hide. Bad ideas should be argued against this way, not de-platformed entirely. If you're so certain the ideas would be defeated then why not hand out copies of the Turner Diaries to every citizen? Why is racism still around when a true marketplace of ideas would have d…

Again, it was an opinion held by 58% of America (using military to quell looting and property destruction), by a US Senator. Op-eds are the opinion of the writer - that's why they are in the Opinion page. You are acting like Tom Cotton was advocating for some extreme far-right minority view held by only a tiny fraction of insane people, rather than the majority opinion.
Post reply on HN