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

I was laid off in retaliation for anti-discrimination whistleblowing

evhaste.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 209 posts

Re: I was laid off in retaliation for anti-discrimination whistleblowing

#131

Post by sangnoir »

loeg wrote: post #129
sangnoir wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The purpose of flagging is to indicate that a story does not belong on HN. Frivolous flagging—e.g. flagging a story that's clearly on-topic by the site guidelines just because one personally dislikes it—eventually gets an account's flagging privileges taken away. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12173836

GP is arguing that it does not belong on HN.

I'm arguing GP personally dislikes the story despite its merits - it very clearly is related to tech - even though it doesn't need to[0]. Evidently, GP is wrong about it belonging to HN. Flagging a link that doesn't break HN guidelines, only because it offends your sensibilities is abusing flagging rights, IMO.

0. HN links only have to be interesting, to belong. They don't have to be tech-related, despite this being a widely-held belief.

Re: I was laid off in retaliation for anti-discrimination whistleblowing

#132

Post by loeg »

sangnoir wrote: post #131
loeg wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

GP is arguing that it does not belong on HN.

I'm arguing GP personally dislikes the story despite its merits - it very clearly is related to tech - even though it doesn't need to[0]. Evidently, GP is wrong about it belonging to HN. Flagging a link that doesn't break HN guidelines, only because it offends your sensibilities is abusing flagging rights, IMO. 0. HN links only have to be interesting, to belong. They don't have to be tech-related, despite this being…

GP claims it is not interesting:

> exhausting sociopolitical drivel

Re: I was laid off in retaliation for anti-discrimination whistleblowing

#133

Post by ryandrake »

wintogreen74 wrote: post #55

This workplace sounds like a scary environment; this person presents themselves as someone who takes a lot of effort to try and make happy. Frankly it sounds exhausting. I don't get it; I manage 15-20 people and this stuff never comes up. They're visibly quite a diverse group and the rest of it has just never has been an issue, or any of my concern. I advocate for them against their goals and desires and have never c…

> this person presents themselves as someone who takes a lot of effort to try and make happy. Frankly it sounds exhausting.

Your comment reminds me of the Ashley Gjovik story that made the rounds on HN a few times. She was reportedly a project manager at Apple, but reading through her billion-word blog[1], it seems she spent all of her time as an activist filing complaints to regulators and fighting literally everyone and everything in the company. I don't understand how people can keep their actual job performance satisfactory when they're so busy filing complaints and appeals and appeals to appeals and meeting with lawyers all day. Truly, it must be exhausting for them, too.

1: https://www.ashleygjovik.com/apple-legal-battle.html

Re: I was laid off in retaliation for anti-discrimination whistleblowing

#134

Post by sangnoir »

loeg wrote: post #132
sangnoir wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm arguing GP personally dislikes the story despite its merits - it very clearly is related to tech - even though it doesn't need to[0]. Evidently, GP is wrong about it belonging to HN. Flagging a link that doesn't break HN guidelines, only because it offends your sensibilities is abusing flagging rights, IMO. 0. HN links only have to be interesting, to belong. They don't have to be tech-related, despite this being…

GP claims it is not interesting : > exhausting sociopolitical drivel

>> exhausting sociopolitical drivel

That quote would be exhibit A for antipathy, rather than "uninteresting"

Re: I was laid off in retaliation for anti-discrimination whistleblowing

#135

Post by AlbertCory »

TechBro8615 wrote: post #120
AlbertCory wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Without taking any position on this post itself or flagging of it: flagging has just become abusive. It needs serious reform, @dang. I can't speak for the original rationale, but it seems like the intent must be to remove posts or comments that are clearly offensive on some semi-legal grounds (obscene, advocating violence, etc.) Now it's become just "I don't like this." There are many possible reforms, but off the to…

I flagged it because it's exhausting sociopolitical drivel that has nothing to do with tech. If the company discriminated against this person, then prove it in court. Nobody here has sufficient information to make a determination one way or another. And none of us has an obligation to take the author at their word.

I agree 100% with your characterization of the post.

However, I don't agree that flagging it is justified. It's substituting your judgment for that of the 220 people who upvoted it. Unless you're the moderator, that's not your call to make.

Re: I was laid off in retaliation for anti-discrimination whistleblowing

#136

Post by ajross »

DannyBee wrote: post #125
ajross wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Kind of sucks for the transgendered applicants, but understandable I suppose, given the circumstances these days. Yikes. That's true in exactly the same way that segregation kinda sucked for the black kids, but was understandable given the circumstances of the postbellum south. Discrimination against a minority solely for the social conveniences of the majority is a terrible sin. Haven't we had this fight a thousan…

I mean, this kind of "fight" is basically what society is about, and it is unfortunately always hard earned to get anywhere, but i'm also honestly not sure there is a way around this. The principle you give is essentially limitless - your "social convenience" part is doing all the work here - but you can't just define away the things you like but the majority doesn't currently accept [1] as "social convenience" wheth…

> You are essentially arguing that the right things should just take hold immediately

I... don't think that's at all what I'm saying. Upthread commenter was saying that refusing to hire trans people "kind of sucks for them, but is understandable" in a pretty clear oh-well-what-you-gonna-do-about-it frame.

I think that's bad. And the reason it's bad is it's the same logic deployed to serve horrific goals.

I don't think you're saying that it's OK to refuse to hire trans people either. Are you?

Basically: sure, you and your reactionary gender normative compatriots are more than welcome to "fight about it". That's what you're doing right now. Just don't take it to the point where you're trying to exclude people from your workplaces. Because that's fucking awful.

Re: I was laid off in retaliation for anti-discrimination whistleblowing

#137

Post by TechBro8615 »

AlbertCory wrote: post #135
TechBro8615 wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I flagged it because it's exhausting sociopolitical drivel that has nothing to do with tech. If the company discriminated against this person, then prove it in court. Nobody here has sufficient information to make a determination one way or another. And none of us has an obligation to take the author at their word.

I agree 100% with your characterization of the post. However, I don't agree that flagging it is justified. It's substituting your judgment for that of the 220 people who upvoted it. Unless you're the moderator, that's not your call to make.

Flagging is a privilege you get with 500 karma. By definition it's my call to make, or else there wouldn't be a "flag" button available to me. However, note that moderators can silently ignore flags from certain users. For example I'm pretty sure my own flags have no impact. Whereas soon after I reached 500 karma, one flag from me was enough to set a post to flagged, but at some point my flags stopped making a difference. I'm guessing that if you flag too many "false alarms" then the moderators just turn your flag button into a no-op.

Re: I was laid off in retaliation for anti-discrimination whistleblowing

#138

Post by TechBro8615 »

sangnoir wrote: post #134
loeg wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

GP claims it is not interesting : > exhausting sociopolitical drivel

>> exhausting sociopolitical drivel That quote would be exhibit A for antipathy, rather than "uninteresting"

No, I do mean to say it's uninteresting, because I can predict all the replies. Without any factual basis for discussion, it will inevitably devolve into a predictable - and thus uninteresting - argument rooted in opposing idealogical positions of a culture war.

Re: I was laid off in retaliation for anti-discrimination whistleblowing

#140

Post by flangola7 »

pc86 wrote: post #106
dingledork69 wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Please actually respond to the points made given their most charitable interpretation, as the guidelines suggest.

They did exactly that, you just don't like it.
Post reply on HN