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

Meta bans staff from open discussion of Roe vs. Wade

businessinsider.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 297 posts

Re: Meta bans staff from open discussion of Roe vs. Wade

#11

Post by Hydraulix989 »

zeronine wrote: post #9
pacarvalho wrote: post #2

Tricky. Politics/societal/economic/etc issues such as this one are very important to be discussed. However, companies are a place for work. Talking to co-workers can be quite fulfilling and exciting when conversing about engineering, marketing, or other work related subjects you are passionate about. However, anytime politics, etc are brought up I (for one) leave the conversation feeling in a worse state of mind than…

better keep my mouth shut then, can't have the productivity police issuing me a conversation penalty or i might end up in the stop-being-human prison

You're at work doing a job, you aren't getting paid to converse about non work matters. If working at say Coinbase or any other apolitical tech company isn't your cup of tea, then there are plenty of politically charged places you can work instead that also need software engineers such as the CTO office of the President, Defense tech, think tanks, Congressional offices, Twitter, Planned Parenthood, PETA, and any other activist group really. It depends on what you're looking for. I can certainly understand why some companies may wish to be politically neutral, as choosing sides can be bad for business and against shareholder interests.

Re: Meta bans staff from open discussion of Roe vs. Wade

#12

Post by claytongulick »

zeronine wrote: post #9
pacarvalho wrote: post #2

Tricky. Politics/societal/economic/etc issues such as this one are very important to be discussed. However, companies are a place for work. Talking to co-workers can be quite fulfilling and exciting when conversing about engineering, marketing, or other work related subjects you are passionate about. However, anytime politics, etc are brought up I (for one) leave the conversation feeling in a worse state of mind than…

better keep my mouth shut then, can't have the productivity police issuing me a conversation penalty or i might end up in the stop-being-human prison

Working for an employer is selling your time and effort to them.

During the time that the employer is purchasing from you, your duty is to your employer, fulfilling their legal requests.

If you don't fulfill this duty, they will no longer have a desire to buy your time.

It's really not any more complicated than that.

Re: Meta bans staff from open discussion of Roe vs. Wade

#13

Post by jen20 »

snidane wrote: post #6
spacexsucks wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Policy affects daily life. A stable daily life leads to a productive worker. Wanting stable work but not doing anything to support the workers life is the biggest most capitalistic thing too. Heartless and inhumane

The company doesn't have the power to change politics like that, so there is no point in getting the company involved or pick sides. The only neutral solution is to ban political discussions in the workplace, same as it should be in schools. Any other way leads to a psychologically unsafe environment to work at, which definitely doesn't lead to a stable daily life and thus a productive worker.

Companies absolutely have the power to change this: with their donations. There is a reason that “Citizens United” is such a drag on humanity.

Re: Meta bans staff from open discussion of Roe vs. Wade

#14

Post by genocidicbunny »

snidane wrote: post #6
spacexsucks wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Policy affects daily life. A stable daily life leads to a productive worker. Wanting stable work but not doing anything to support the workers life is the biggest most capitalistic thing too. Heartless and inhumane

The company doesn't have the power to change politics like that, so there is no point in getting the company involved or pick sides. The only neutral solution is to ban political discussions in the workplace, same as it should be in schools. Any other way leads to a psychologically unsafe environment to work at, which definitely doesn't lead to a stable daily life and thus a productive worker.

A company like Meta absolutely has the power to weigh in on the politics. It wouldn't be pretty and would get a lot of blowback, but they can absolutely affect the politics. They could ban any anti-abortion messaging, they could promote pro-choice viewpoints, they could block proponents of the recent decision. They could change their algorithms to manipulate people's feeds in any which way -- for example, show a pro-lifer only pro-choice topics. They could do the complete opposite of that too. If they wanted to, they could absolutely shut down one side of the debate to the benefit of the other.

Re: Meta bans staff from open discussion of Roe vs. Wade

#17

Post by panaceaeaea »

Seeing the way these threads play out on HN, I think this is a good decision. Some people just don't know how to be civil when it comes to things like this.

If I had to work with someone every day who insists on talking about something that'll be filling up the next month of news cycle, I'd rather find somewhere else to work

edit: I personally support choice, but I don't support people who try to maneuver every conversation in a political us vs them direction. People who do this irl are insufferable and unprofessional

edit: and not only this, but people who will harass, sabotage, and smear coworkers over things like this. If someone thinks this kind of behavior is OK, it makes me much less likely to be sympathetic to whatever they're trying to accomplish. This kind of behavior should be banned for the same reason that prayer in school should be banned, and for the exact same reasons

Re: Meta bans staff from open discussion of Roe vs. Wade

#18

Post by CodeBeater »

I think that we are missing the point here. Meta is banning open discussion on their internal platform. It does not mean that you can't chat about it with a co-worker that also happens to be your friend.

I think it's reasonable. It has nothing to do with not getting people distracted, but all to do with having one less problem to deal with.

Re: Meta bans staff from open discussion of Roe vs. Wade

#19

Post by CalChris »

pacarvalho wrote: post #2

Tricky. Politics/societal/economic/etc issues such as this one are very important to be discussed. However, companies are a place for work. Talking to co-workers can be quite fulfilling and exciting when conversing about engineering, marketing, or other work related subjects you are passionate about. However, anytime politics, etc are brought up I (for one) leave the conversation feeling in a worse state of mind than…

> However, companies are a place for work.

That is a fine rule if work expects nothing of you when you clock out at 5 pm.

Re: Meta bans staff from open discussion of Roe vs. Wade

#20

Post by klyrs »

zeronine wrote: post #9
pacarvalho wrote: post #2

Tricky. Politics/societal/economic/etc issues such as this one are very important to be discussed. However, companies are a place for work. Talking to co-workers can be quite fulfilling and exciting when conversing about engineering, marketing, or other work related subjects you are passionate about. However, anytime politics, etc are brought up I (for one) leave the conversation feeling in a worse state of mind than…

better keep my mouth shut then, can't have the productivity police issuing me a conversation penalty or i might end up in the stop-being-human prison

Funny how HN is chock full of diehard libertarian free speech absolutists, but if you've got a job, check your personhood at the door.
Post reply on HN