Good for them for trying to avoid the "Get woke go broke" phenomenon.
Gitlab: don't discuss politics at work
731–740 of 1001 posts
Re: Gitlab: don't discuss politics at work
#732Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Refusing to serve a customer when you disagree with that customer's goal is pretty far from being a "moral arbiter for society." Keep in mind that anyone is free to use other services (or roll their own) and gitlab can't do anything about that. Neither would it be overreaching for the workers building that product to request a say in how it's used. I think this is the crux of the issue. Anyone is of course free to…
Or, just break up the alleged monopoly under existing anti-trust regulation, instead of welcoming a terrifying new power of the government mandating that private business serve customers they disagree with?
I lean libertarian, but sometimes realty breaks that.
True libertarianism dictates that I can ban whomever I want from my shop. But in reality most of the bans were of the 'No Negroes' variety. I would love to think that the free market would take care of discriminatory businesses, but history shows it will not.
I agree that the true issue is ultimately monopoly: if a town has 10 newspapers and one goes democrat-leaning, no one would really care. But it's different if there is only 1 newspaper.
I worry that there can only ever be a single Friendster/Google+/Myspace around, because people will always gravitate towards the most popular one.
Re: Gitlab: don't discuss politics at work
#733Telling people not to discuss politics at work IS discussing politics at work.
Re: Gitlab: don't discuss politics at work
#734Without trying to be inflammatory in any manner, I will say that it takes a certain level of privilege to say one shouldn’t discuss politics at work. If you disagree I’m happy to discuss this viewpoint rather than being downvoted to oblivion. Lots of issues are deemed “political”, but imagine you fall into one of the marginalized groups: — lgbt: Don’t discuss the possibility about being fired for your sexuality becau…
It takes a huge amount of privilege to be able to talk about politics at work. The despised minorities, like zoophiles, would not only be fired but arrested with the whole office cheering that on.
Something I find pretty odd given that fucking a cow is a lot better for the cow than eating it.
Re: Gitlab: don't discuss politics at work
#735I personally think this is awesome. I don't wan't some git hosting startup to be the arbiter of morality for society. The engineers, designers, and PMs shouldn't have an outsized voice in society because they have a specialized useful skillset and ended up on a successful product. If these users are breaking laws, then put them out of business via the courts and sieze the assets (the repos in this case) via legal mea…
[deleted]
Re: Gitlab: don't discuss politics at work
#736Earlier quoted context omitted.
The site guideline is " Please use the original title, unless it is misleading or linkbait. " Since Gitlab retracted that part of their policy, that part of the title became misleading. That's why I edited it. As always, we're open to suggestions for a better, i.e. more accurate and neutral, title. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
It wasn't misleading at the time that the article was written though, or even at the time that it was submitted. This article was posted here two hours ago, and the changes on the Gitlab repository were made an hour ago. Is it now the policy of HN to keep titles up to date as events change?
We have the full context here. I appreciate the change dang made given this post is #1 on HN and about a tool (git) we all use.
Re: Gitlab: don't discuss politics at work
#737Earlier quoted context omitted.
> We can’t improve without discussion, and it’s unfortunate that these type of issues are so divisive. Except Cancel Culture is making it that these can't be discussed without complete agreement. Take for example, "Women in Tech", personally I don't see underrepresentation of women in tech as a problem that can be or should be 'solved'. For the better part of 15 years, there has been a massive movement to encourage w…
>personally I don't see underrepresentation of women in tech as a problem that can be or should be 'solved' I say the below not as an attempt to criticize you for this viewpoint, but as a way to try to explain why this viewpoint is often interpreted as sexist. The question is why do you believe this? The possible explanations for why women are underrepresented in tech basically comes down to either nature or nurture.…
> It doesn't take much of a leap for people to hear the non-sexist "woman don't do this" as the sexist "women can't do this"
Have you considered that this assumed malice is creating a false sense of sexism in the industry and in turn driving women away from the industry?
Re: Gitlab: don't discuss politics at work
#738For those who are a little confused about the no politics at work thing... If you read the policy we link to about politics, we mention people talking politics during coffee chats, 1-on-1s, etc, but as a general rule we don't lead with those topics. We focus on inclusion, and we have been very successful at that by respecting others and making work a collaborative, judgment free place. As someone who sometimes has th…
what marketing firm do you work for? Oh you're literally the content marketer for gitlab lol (as per your comment history). you're literally getting paid to say this.
That doesn’t make it untrue or any less valuable.
Re: Gitlab: don't discuss politics at work
#739Earlier quoted context omitted.
Wow, that is such a clear analysis that someone should transcribe it. Here's the main part of what Naval says: "If Google, Facebook, and Twitter had been smart about this, they would not have picked sides. They would have said "We're publishers. Whatever goes through our pipes goes through our pipes. If it's illegal, we'll take it down. Give us a court order. Otherwise we don't touch it." It's like the phone company.…
The phone company analogy doesn't really work, because phone calls are by default private, between exactly two parties, usually just two people. If you look at the tech company equivalent of that, like FB messenger, or Hangouts, or other messaging systems, they behave more similarly to the phone company. It'd be difficult to get in trouble for something you said in a private message. If you want the analogy to make s…
Perhaps if it's presented this way:
Group X that we don't like gets its phone service from AT&T. We know they're conducting their hateful business, fundraising, and coordination over AT&T's service. We need to put pressure on AT&T to cut off their service, or we'll assume that AT&T endorses their message.
Re: Gitlab: don't discuss politics at work
#740I personally think this is awesome. I don't wan't some git hosting startup to be the arbiter of morality for society. The engineers, designers, and PMs shouldn't have an outsized voice in society because they have a specialized useful skillset and ended up on a successful product. If these users are breaking laws, then put them out of business via the courts and sieze the assets (the repos in this case) via legal mea…
Wow, that is such a clear analysis that someone should transcribe it. Here's the main part of what Naval says: "If Google, Facebook, and Twitter had been smart about this, they would not have picked sides. They would have said "We're publishers. Whatever goes through our pipes goes through our pipes. If it's illegal, we'll take it down. Give us a court order. Otherwise we don't touch it." It's like the phone company.…
Considering In-Q-Tels involvement, sometimes I think they major social media companies were setup as trojan horses to enable censorship and governmental control in the first place. (besides the more obvious surveillance aspect)