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

Agent fired from literary agency for using Parler and Gab

newsweek.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 597 posts

Re: Agent fired from literary agency for using Parler and Gab

#71

Post by swirepe »

Zuider wrote: post #62
kelnos wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right, so it's a bit more coarse then banning or allowing users, but if you selectively ban or allow topics that certain kinds of users want to talk about (or don't want talked about), you can definitely shape your user base.

Selective banning carried out by reacting to infractions is is a relatively coarse tool compared to whitelisting a set of users on the basis of credentials or avowed common interest.

>whitelisting a set of users on the basis of credentials or avowed common interest.

Like r/the_donald. Mods can effectively whitelist a set of users by banning everyone else.

Re: Agent fired from literary agency for using Parler and Gab

#72

Post by [deleted] »

floatingatoll wrote: post #60
nobodyandproud wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An employee can claim that politics, affiliation, etc. was a pretext for firing based on religious beliefs.

Given that this statement is false — "Gab and Parler are religious social networks" — a judge would likely require a pattern of hostility to be shown, or for the firings to coincide with expression of protected religious beliefs that are not also considered hate speech. (If they're considered hate speech, they're no longer protected expression, regardless of whether they're claimed to be religion or not.)

[deleted]

Re: Agent fired from literary agency for using Parler and Gab

#75

Post by swirepe »

dhosek wrote: post #20
gedy wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Parler was passed around in many conversations with everyday, normal people who signed up thinking "I'll check this out". Signing up wasn't some pact with evil to them. And there are plenty of fascists on Twitter.

But from everything I've heard from people who have signed up thinking "I'll check this out," the net response is, "oh my God, this is so much worse than I could have ever imagined."

We've all hung around too long, curious about how bad the fire can get. That doesn't mean we're arsonists.

Re: Agent fired from literary agency for using Parler and Gab

#76

Post by sneak »

snicker7 wrote: post #73

At this point, companies might as well just have an explicit policy of not hiring anyone registered as a Republican. Party affiliation is not a protected class, after all.

This feels a bit snarky.

There seems to me, looking at all of this US hyperpartisan nonsense as an outsider, to be quite a bit of difference between the frothy Gab/Parler/etc contingent and an average median republican (who I don't really imagine spends a ton of time on niche social media).

Re: Agent fired from literary agency for using Parler and Gab

#77

Post by sneak »

hertzrat wrote: post #25
cblconfederate wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

but if a future employer asks to see some social credentials and they don't see any, they ll be suspicious

Social media accounts are not credentials, and that requirement is bogus for 99% of jobs unless your job is social media publicity

Forget about credentials, hiring someone is a risk and you basically go into it as an employer flying blind.

I request social media links (not passwords, just profile links) from everyone I'm considering hiring, because any/all information I can use to winnow potentially problem hires out before I make an offer is extremely valuable to me.

You can tell a lot about a person from their social media profiles and posts.

Re: Agent fired from literary agency for using Parler and Gab

#78

Post by [deleted] »

sneak wrote: post #76
snicker7 wrote: post #73

At this point, companies might as well just have an explicit policy of not hiring anyone registered as a Republican. Party affiliation is not a protected class, after all.

This feels a bit snarky. There seems to me, looking at all of this US hyperpartisan nonsense as an outsider, to be quite a bit of difference between the frothy Gab/Parler/etc contingent and an average median republican (who I don't really imagine spends a ton of time on niche social media).

[deleted]

Re: Agent fired from literary agency for using Parler and Gab

#80

Post by nobodyandproud »

floatingatoll wrote: post #60
nobodyandproud wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An employee can claim that politics, affiliation, etc. was a pretext for firing based on religious beliefs.

Given that this statement is false — "Gab and Parler are religious social networks" — a judge would likely require a pattern of hostility to be shown, or for the firings to coincide with expression of protected religious beliefs that are not also considered hate speech. (If they're considered hate speech, they're no longer protected expression, regardless of whether they're claimed to be religion or not.)

You know this how?

https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/can-employers-discri...

Specifically: “ Even if you work in a state that doesn’t protect employees from political discrimination, you might still have a legal claim if your employer’s actions were really based on a protected trait under Title VII or a similar state law. For example, if African American employees are fired for participating in a Black Lives Matter rally, but employees of other races are not fired for going to marches, rallies, or protests, that might qualify as illegal race discrimination. ”

You don’t have enough information to say either way, and the law and courts aren’t as cut-and-dry as you want to believe.

Post reply on HN