Armed Polite Society
Main Forums => Politics => Topic started by: Ben on August 08, 2017, 12:29:29 AM
-
By firing the guy who had a diverse opinion. Again (before somebody jumps in to tell me) they are a private (well, publicly traded) company and can fire and hire who they want, but this is pretty hypocritical, especially if you listen to their "reasoning". No different than the UC Berkeley campus.
As much as I like using Google products, this kind of crap makes me consider veering in the Luddite direction and getting by with lesser technology, just to not feed the beast.
http://twitchy.com/brettt-3136/2017/08/07/employee-whose-memo-criticized-google-as-an-ideological-echo-chamber-reportedly-fired/
Oh, and here is an example of the Google mindset on the matter:
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-08-08/google-fires-employee-behind-controversial-diversity-memo?cmpid=socialflow-twitter-business&utm_content=business&utm_campaign=socialflow-organic&utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social
-
You take Caesars silver, you do Caesar's bidding.
You just can't criticize your employer on a public forum and not expect repercussions.
As soon as I saw that guys post I knew he would get the ax.
That's what speaking the truth earns these days.
-
I love how they turned a guy who could have been dismissed as a cranky antisoc into a persecuted victim while also completely confirming his manifesto. Does this have something to do with how Trump got elected?
-
You take Caesars silver, you do Caesar's bidding.
You just can't criticize your employer on a public forum and not expect repercussions.
As soon as I saw that guys post I knew he would get the ax.
That's what speaking the truth your mind earns these days.
Agreed, before and after the fix. Criticizing your employer in a public forum is never going to end well. I bet every company has a social media policy that prohibits Bad Speak.
-
I thought he wrote an internal (i.e. NOT public) memo. Blaming him if someone else took it public is classic shoot the messenger tactics.
“We are unequivocal in our belief that diversity and inclusion are critical to our success as a company,” Brown said in the statement. “We’ll continue to stand for that and be committed to it for the long haul.”
The memo and surrounding debate comes as Google fends off a lawsuit from the U.S. Department of Labor alleging the company systemically discriminates against women. Google has denied the charges, arguing that it doesn’t have a gender gap in pay, but has declined to share full salary information with the government. According to the company’s most recent demographic report, 69 percent of its workforce and 80 percent of its technical staff are male.
So much for diversity and inclusion.
-
You take Caesars silver, you do Caesar's bidding.
You just can't criticize your employer on a public forum and not expect repercussions.
As soon as I saw that guys post I knew he would get the ax.
That's what speaking the truth earns these days.
You're right.
He didn't. He did it internally and someone who wanted him to get fired leaked it to the press.
Given California's rather expansive laws about workplace discrimination, he likely has a significant claim against Google now. I hope he sues them into the ground. (Of course, he can't, but we can dream.)
-
He didn't. He did it internally and someone who wanted him to get fired leaked it to the press.
He would have been fired anyway. After all, feelz wuz hurted.
And, after all, a guy who didn't even work for Google any more said he wouldn't assign people to work with the author of the memo. How damning is THAT?!?!
-
I have to wonder if this would be called a "manifesto" if it was written by a lesbian writing about a heterosexual culture at Google. While the dictionary definition of "manifesto" can be used for this incident, the word itself has, in my experience at least, always had a negative connotation. Bad people write manifestos, good people write essays or memos.
-
"The company was founded under the principles of freedom of expression, diversity, inclusiveness and science-based thinking”
-Alphabet Chairman Eric Schmidt
;/
-
http://www.dailywire.com/news/17400/google-hiring-less-white-men-progress-robert-kraychik
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=64PKoAiWhjE
-
The text of the memo:
https://diversitymemo.com/
ETA: he has a job offer from WikiLeaks: http://fortune.com/2017/08/08/wikileaks-google-anti-diversity-memo/
Censorship is for losers.
-
I knew the ax would fall the minute I read the new Diversity Exec's response to his memo....
"It puts the diversity on its skin, or else it gets the hose again."
-
I knew the ax would fall the minute I read the new Diversity Exec's response to his memo....
The fact that there is such a position as "Diversity Executive", which apparently has nearly the power of a CEO, is a travesty. Straight outa 1984. Or the Political Officer on the Red October.
-
The fact that there is such a position as "Diversity Executive", which apparently has nearly the power of a CEO, is a travesty. Straight outta 1984. Or the Political Officer on the Red October.
Quoted for truth! Damn it, "1984" was a warning, not a frikin instruction manual!
-
The fact that there is such a position as "Diversity Executive", which apparently has nearly the power of a CEO, is a travesty. Straight outa 1984. Or the Political Officer on the Red October.
Oh it's a thing. Lot of big corps have it or similar. Hell we have a VP of Diversity and Inclusion.
Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk
-
Oh it's a thing. Lot of big corps have it or similar. Hell we have a VP of Diversity and Inclusion.
Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk
Oh, I realize big companies, corps, and govs have them and have had them for a while. The travesty for me is the amount of power they have been given of late. Usually a VP of this or that doesn't have as much power as the title would infer, but that doesn't seem to be the case with these "diversity executives".
-
Oh, I realize big companies, corps, and govs have them and have had them for a while. The travesty for me is the amount of power they have been given of late. Usually a VP of this or that doesn't have as much power as the title would infer, but that doesn't seem to be the case with these "diversity executives".
You will be inclusive or will be excluded!
Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk
-
Quoted for truth! Damn it, "1984" was a warning, not a frikin instruction manual!
So was Idiocracy yet the lowbrow left has embraced it as an instructional video none the less.
-
The text of the memo:
https://diversitymemo.com/
ETA: he has a job offer from WikiLeaks: http://fortune.com/2017/08/08/wikileaks-google-anti-diversity-memo/
They shouldn't have fired the guy, they should have made him the CEO.
-
"The company was founded under the principles of freedom of expression, diversity, inclusiveness and science-based thinking”
-Alphabet Chairman Eric Schmidt
;/
And, like most people, you left off the second part of that vision statement...
"As long as everything things, feels, and believes the same thing without dissent."
-
Having read the "memo", there isn't anything scientifically wrong, inaccurate or even offensive about it.
-
Well, having now read the memo, it's pretty obvious why the guy was fired.
He wasn't fired for being a dickcentric purveyor of mysogynistic hurty stereotypes.
He was fired because he dared to challenge the hive mind that is Google.
-
Unless you're a SJW...
-
Having read the "memo", there isn't anything scientifically wrong, inaccurate or even offensive about it.
If anything, he's actually "pro-woman" in that he makes suggestions that would promote more female participation and advancement on the tech side.
-
If anything, he's actually "pro-woman" in that he makes suggestions that would promote more female participation and advancement on the tech side.
Yep. I'd call it at worst constructive criticism.
-
If anything, he's actually "pro-woman" in that he makes suggestions that would promote more female participation and advancement on the tech side.
It's become increasingly clear to me that the Left is actually anti-woman, while at the same time they're anti-man. And anti-child. And anti-white. And anti-black. They just seem to be anti-human, promoting everything that hurts us all, while opposing nearly anything that will help make things better.
And, like most people, you left off the second part of that vision statement...
"As long as everything things, feels, and believes the same thing without dissent."
Well that clears it up. :lol:
-
It's become increasingly clear to me that the Left is actually anti-woman, while at the same time they're anti-man. And anti-child. And anti-white. And anti-black. They just seem to be anti-human, promoting everything that hurts us all, while opposing nearly anything that will help make things better.
I also blame the MSM as well as the left, (but I guess that's redundant). All the usual players took information on the memo from out of context quotes on the various progressive social media sites (who were also calling it a "manifesto", which the MSM also took up). Had the MSM read the entire memo, they wouldn't have perpetuated the very misleading talking points of the left. Or if they did read the entire memo and then just kept using the out of context portions, then I guess one more data point on "fake news".
The fact that Google did have the entire memo and still did what they did, speaks volumes about them.
-
I also blame the MSM as well as the left, (but I guess that's redundant). All the usual players took information on the memo from out of context quotes on the various progressive social media sites (who were also calling it a "manifesto", which the MSM also took up). Had the MSM read the entire memo, they wouldn't have perpetuated the very misleading talking points of the left. Or if they did read the entire memo and then just kept using the out of context portions, then I guess one more data point on "fake news".
Like the news outlet that took SLPC's slanderous mischaracterization of a religious liberty group at face value?
-
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DG1x2nSVYAQBHUp.jpg)
:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
-
http://twitchy.com/gregp-3534/2017/08/10/weird-right-a-search-for-james-damore-on-google-news-wont-autocomplete/
-
http://twitchy.com/gregp-3534/2017/08/10/weird-right-a-search-for-james-damore-on-google-news-wont-autocomplete/
Actually, it does.
-
Couple thoughts
- Dude was a complete moron for posting honestly in a company forum. Even, ESPECIALLY, when the company asks for your open and honest opinion. You lie. You lie hard, you lie long. You lie about lying. The company policy is the bestest policy and anyone who disagrees is a counterrevolutionary criminal that should be sent to Siberia. I even wore a Soviet hat to the Six Sigma training and was denouncing coworkers who were not sufficiently dedicated to the glorious Sigma revolution. The instructor thought it was a nice hat.
- California has a bazillion laws on the book. And it's not a right to work state. So there's even odds that they illegally fired him. It's disputed.
- Google did not help matters in their public comments denouncing the guy. That's a healthy settlement offer if Google's lawyers are smart. I'd demand somewhere between five and ten mill to shut up and disappear.
-
Couple thoughts
- Dude was a complete moron for posting honestly in a company forum.
Was it actually a company forum? Not doubting you, just not sure as there seem to be several versions. The one I heard is that he emailed the memo to only something like ten specific people (I'm assuming his bosses and whatever group Google assigns for employee suggestions and what have you) And someone there hit the "forward" button and it took off from there.
To me, there would be a big difference between posting to a company forum that all the employees could read, and sending it to targeted individuals because you just wanted to help and did not in fact want the thing spread far and wide without explanation or background.
-
Was it actually a company forum? Not doubting you, just not sure as there seem to be several versions. The one I heard is that he emailed the memo to only something like ten specific people (I'm assuming his bosses and whatever group Google assigns for employee suggestions and what have you) And someone there hit the "forward" button and it took off from there.
To me, there would be a big difference between posting to a company forum that all the employees could read, and sending it to targeted individuals because you just wanted to help and did not in fact want the thing spread far and wide without explanation or background.
I'm sure it will be covered in the lawsuit. I'm ignoring the details from the media, because they range from out of context to purely fabricated. Gist everyone agrees on is Google wanted a discussion on diversity and whatnot. And someone leaked someone else giving an honest sourced opinion. And now everyone is piling on the guy, including Google.
Stupidity comes at a price. This guy is going to learn it, quickly. Again, he may win a settlement. Or Google could spend 10x the settlement on their legions of lawyers to send a specific message.
Play stupid game, win stupid prize.
-
I'm sure it will be covered in the lawsuit. I'm ignoring the details from the media, because they range from out of context to purely fabricated. Gist everyone agrees on is Google wanted a discussion on diversity and whatnot. And someone leaked someone else giving an honest sourced opinion. And now everyone is piling on the guy, including Google.
His story is that he went to diversity training and didn't like what he saw and he felt it was counterproductive, unscientific, and likely illegal as it encouraged the perpetration of sexism and racism in hiring and employee development. He posted his thoughts on an internal Google employee discussion group. It was forwarded from there. This was not an official thing at all.
-
http://www.dailywire.com/news/17400/google-hiring-less-white-men-progress-robert-kraychik
In other news, Daily Wire obviously hiring FEWER people who passed English class.
-
Google CEO schedules all-hands meeting to discuss/spin the Damore firing, then cancels it:
https://www.cnbc.com/2017/08/10/google-ceo-sundar-pichai-cancels-all-hands-meeting.html
We had hoped to have a frank, open discussion today as we always do to bring us together and move forward.
"... which is why we fired the last guy who tried to have a frank, open discussion."
-
His story is that he went to diversity training and didn't like what he saw and he felt it was counterproductive, unscientific, and likely illegal as it encouraged the perpetration of sexism and racism in hiring and employee development. He posted his thoughts on an internal Google employee discussion group. It was forwarded from there. This was not an official thing at all.
Damn stupid either way.
Seriously. He's likely correct that was counterproductive, unscientific and illegal. He likely had good motivation and clean intentions. He's probably not even really a puppy kicking sexist cisgendered oppressor. But speaking up against that is akin to declaring yourself a Satanist at the height of the Spanish Inquisition. You shouldn't be surprised if they declare you a heretic and burn you at the stake, even if you had good intentions, well sourced material and are ultimately correct. Ideology doesn't work like that and he should have known better.
Google is very closed minded, intolerant and bigoted. With sexist policies. Pointing that out to ANY company will result in a quick firing. Usually the smarter ones have good enough lawyers and/or managers to make it look unrelated to an employee pointing out such things. Or at least plausibly enough to avoid a settlement
Likely they see it as cheap for the PR.
-
Google CEO schedules all-hands meeting to discuss/spin the Damore firing, then cancels it:
https://www.cnbc.com/2017/08/10/google-ceo-sundar-pichai-cancels-all-hands-meeting.html
"... which is why we fired the last guy who tried to have a frank, open discussion."
I like this part:
And some are worried that you cannot speak out at work freely. All of your voices and opinions matter...and I want to hear them.
Also the part about "some of you wish we would do more." So do more what? Instead of firing the guy, take him to the prison down in level 47 of the Google lair?
-
"It puts the diversity on its skin, or else it gets the hose again."
This is so creepily accurate.
It's become increasingly clear to me that the Left is actually anti-woman, while at the same time they're anti-man. And anti-child. And anti-white. And anti-black. They just seem to be anti-human, promoting everything that hurts us all, while opposing nearly anything that will help make things better.
So is this.
-
Various news channels are now blaming "threats" from the Alt Right for causing Google to cancel its koombayah meeting.
-
Google has the right to hire or fire anyone they want in my opinion, just like any other employer.
And by exercising that right in this case, they have once again outed themselves as a pack of evil hypocrites.
-
Apparently what folks noodled out, google was worried they wouldn't be able to control the narrative at a large meeting. Better to have a ton of much smaller meetings that are more easily staged, controlled, scripted. If something goes off the rails, it's an isolated incident. They can learn as they go and prune out dissenting opinion without it impacting everyone.
They have an absolute right to crush internal dissent and be politically biased as hell. I'm not knocking that. But they've in the past tried to portray themselves as "good guys" rather than say, Evil Big Bad Microsoft. Hilariously now, Apple is the enemy of geeks and MS is the plucky do-gooder more often than not. Except their Windows 10 team, which are so evil that Satan, Zombie Hitler and Pluto have gotten restraining orders against them.
-
But they've in the past tried to portray themselves as "good guys" rather than say, Evil Big Bad Microsoft.
This is what irks me the most. If they were honest about bias against certain viewpoints, or even just outright said "we will not hire conservatives" (not that the employee was conservative), at least they're being honest. But when their HR mission statement is "We embrace all viewpoints" then they fire the guy, nothing they say carries weight with me. If they really embraced all viewpoints, they would be reprimanding or "counseling" the employees that attacked this guy. Possibly starting with the CEO.
-
Couple thoughts
- Dude was a complete moron for posting honestly in a company forum. Even, ESPECIALLY, when the company asks for your open and honest opinion. You lie. You lie hard, you lie long. You lie about lying. The company policy is the bestest policy and anyone who disagrees is a counterrevolutionary criminal that should be sent to Siberia. I even wore a Soviet hat to the Six Sigma training and was denouncing coworkers who were not sufficiently dedicated to the glorious Sigma revolution. The instructor thought it was a nice hat.
Oh, pleasepleasepleasepleaseplease tell me there is video of that. I will pay money to watch it.
[popcorn] [popcorn] [popcorn] [popcorn] [popcorn] [popcorn]
And the reason they cancelled the big meeting is Lawyers. Damore is going to get a big payout. The last thing Google's lawyers wanted is video of Google's CEO, standing up on stage, shoving his foot in his mouth, as "Plaintiff's Exhibit #1".
-
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/11/opinion/sundar-pichai-google-memo-diversity.html?smprod=nytcore-ipad&smid=nytcore-ipad-share
In his memo, Damore cites a series of studies, making the case, for example, that men tend to be more interested in things and women more interested in people. (Interest is not the same as ability.) Several scientists in the field have backed up his summary of the data. “Despite how it’s been portrayed, the memo was fair and factually accurate,” Debra Soh wrote in The Globe and Mail in Toronto.
Geoffrey Miller, a prominent evolutionary psychologist, wrote in Quillette, “For what it’s worth, I think that almost all of the Google memo’s empirical claims are scientifically accurate.”
...
Of course subtlety is in hibernation in modern America. The third player in the drama is Google’s diversity officer, Danielle Brown. She didn’t wrestle with any of the evidence behind Damore’s memo. She just wrote his views “advanced incorrect assumptions about gender.” This is ideology obliterating reason.
Bolded for truth.
-
(https://armedpolitesociety.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fstatic.pjmedia.com%2Finstapundit%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2017%2F08%2FScreen-Shot-2017-08-11-at-2.28.54-PM-491x600.png&hash=3756f0b0ee5ef5375200489fa5ed5d26edebe4ea)
:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
-
This is what irks me the most. If they were honest about bias against certain viewpoints, or even just outright said "we will not hire conservatives" (not that the employee was conservative), at least they're being honest. But when their HR mission statement is "We embrace all viewpoints" then they fire the guy, nothing they say carries weight with me. If they really embraced all viewpoints, they would be reprimanding or "counseling" the employees that attacked this guy. Possibly starting with the CEO.
^^^^^This.
-
Google Diversity Queen's initial response to the memo. ("Plantiff's Exhibit #2 Your Honor....")
Affirming our commitment to diversity and inclusion—and healthy debate
Googlers,
I’m Danielle, Google’s brand new VP of Diversity, Integrity & Governance. I started just a couple of weeks ago, and I had hoped to take another week or so to get the lay of the land before introducing myself to you all. But given the heated debate we’ve seen over the past few days, I feel compelled to say a few words.
Many of you have read an internal document shared by someone in our engineering organization, expressing views on the natural abilities and characteristics of different genders, as well as whether one can speak freely of these things at Google. And like many of you, I found that it advanced incorrect assumptions about gender. I'm not going to link to it here as it's not a viewpoint that I or this company endorses, promotes or encourages.
Diversity and inclusion are a fundamental part of our values and the culture we continue to cultivate. We are unequivocal in our belief that diversity and inclusion are critical to our success as a company, and we'll continue to stand for that and be committed to it for the long haul. As Ari Balogh said in his internal G+ post, “Building an open, inclusive environment is core to who we are, and the right thing to do. ‘Nuff said.”
Google has taken a strong stand on this issue, by releasing its demographic data and creating a company wide OKR on diversity and inclusion. Strong stands elicit strong reactions. Changing a culture is hard, and it's often uncomfortable. But I firmly believe Google is doing the right thing, and that's why I took this job.
Part of building an open, inclusive environment means fostering a culture in which those with alternative views, including different political views, feel safe sharing their opinions. But that discourse needs to work alongside the principles of equal employment found in our Code of Conduct, policies, and anti-discrimination laws.
I’ve been in the industry for a long time, and I can tell you that I’ve never worked at a company that has so many platforms for employees to express themselves — TGIF, Memegen, internal G+, thousands of discussion groups. I know this conversation doesn’t end with my email today. I look forward to continuing to hear your thoughts as I settle in and meet with Googlers across the company.
Thanks,
Danielle
The bolded part would be the literal "Money Quote".
-
Google Diversity Queen's initial response to the memo. ("Plantiff's Exhibit #2 Your Honor....")
The bolded part would be the literal "Money Quote".
Obviously, the problem was that he felt safe expressing his view ... and "safe" was a lie. An interesting counter-note from Danielle's memo:
Many of you have read an internal document shared by someone in our engineering organization, expressing views on the natural abilities and characteristics of different genders, as well as whether one can speak freely of these things at Google. And like many of you, I found that it advanced incorrect assumptions about gender. I'm not going to link to it here as it's not a viewpoint that I or this company endorses, promotes or encourages.
Translation: You can feel free to express your opinions, as long as your opinions support our opinions.
-
(https://armedpolitesociety.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FRLSJoMk.jpg&hash=b1202b1b7b7d33360a83b378df99a6bbd50b5908)
-
Necro instead of a new thread, just for the refresher on the background.
The former Google employee is now suing Google. To reiterate my opinion, which hasn't changed much since this started: Google can hire or fire anyone they want. The guy made a completely logical argument (if people bothered to read the whole thing) and making him out to be some kind of demon is ridiculous. He was practically doxxed after this all came out, and the people who ruined his life are likely still working at Google, happy as snowflake clams.
So interesting to me, is the dichotomy of the two articles (and user comments) on the lawsuit that I have linked below. The Gizmodo article seems to allude that the guy was a KKK type white supremacist all along, and had social media posts confirming that. I never saw any such evidence when this brouhaha started, and his memo contained no language that would suggest he was. Maybe he went a little crazy after he was fired, or maybe it's all made up stuff. Certainly I'm biased against SJWs, but the Gizmodo user comments seem mostly nuts to me.
http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2018/01/09/james-damore-sues-google-claims-tech-giant-discriminates-against-white-conservative-men.html
https://gizmodo.com/anti-diversity-memo-author-sues-google-for-alleged-disc-1821880497
-
The Gizmodo article seems to allude that the guy was a KKK type white supremacist all along, and had social media posts confirming that. I never saw any such evidence when this brouhaha started, and his memo contained no language that would suggest he was. Maybe he went a little crazy after he was fired, or maybe it's all made up stuff. Certainly I'm biased against SJWs, but the Gizmodo user comments seem mostly nuts to me.
You never saw it because it doesn't exist. Their 'secret KKK' member is as he tweeted if you like Dungeons and Dragons, the titles of the KKK (whom he explicitly condemns) ex: Grand Wizard, sound cool. What is great is in the articles condemning his tweets it includes his tweet that you know you are moralizing a matter when no positive aspect of a villain can be acknowledged. So be sure to never express an opinion that while being evil, the Nazis had sharp uniforms, or that Bush wasn't the worst president in the 200+history of the nation, or you will be fired from google.
-
I've read (half) the complaint. I find none of it surprising. Liberals don't want to disagree. The don't want to win. They want to crush you. They want to destroy you.
They want to force you to submit, not even caring if you convert.
That's a frightening ideology.
Hm... their affinity for Islam just became more understandable.
-
From a friend's facebook page:
Jonathon Hauenschild
Former #Google employee James #Damore filed a wrongful termination suit against the tech giant. A few observations from a recovering California employment attorney:
1. The complaint is very well drafted. I don't think I have ever read so thorough a piece as this including exhibits of the anti-male, anti-conservative bias in California (NB, political affiliation/political expression is a protected status in California for purposes of employment decisions);
2. The complaint includes a couple creative, and logical, arguments including discrimination and harassment on the basis of being a white male. While these type of arguments are rare, they are within the reading of the law;
3. The complaint seeks class action status for all similarly situated employees. From what I can tell, there appear to be a couple distinct subclasses: A. Conservative/classical liberal employees who were discriminated against on the basis of political affiliation; and B. White male employees;
4. The complaint should survive, or substantially survive, a demurrer (California lingo for a Motion to Dismiss for all uninitiated attorneys :-D); and
5. The suit includes a couple Causes of Action where I am not persuaded the chances of success are high. However, it is best to include them and let a court decide whether there is merit after the discovery process is complete.
I cannot wait to see what type of evidence the Dhillon Law Firm is able to uncover, especially given the quality of evidence already included in the brief.
-
I'm only a little ways into it, but I'm reading through the lawsuit on Scribd.
Google's biggest mistake (aside from probably illegal hiring practices) was hiring an autist who didn't care about taking their money and sitting through the BS. It's going to be a very interesting next few months. To my uneducated eyes, google is going to get fried.
https://www.scribd.com/document/368692388/James-Damore-Lawsuit
-
[popcorn]
-
As mentioned in the other thread: [popcorn]
-
To my uneducated eyes, google is going to get fried.
Good. Now if someone can just do the same to Book of faces ...
-
Good. Now if someone can just do the same to Book of faces ...
I was thinking more about Youtube. There are already lawsuits over demonetizing videos.
-
Thanks for thread combine, Ben.
Informative reddit thread here:
https://www.reddit.com/r/law/comments/7p0gq5/james_damore_just_filed_a_class_action_lawsuit/
Biggest takeaway from internet discussion so far: Liberals aren't interacting with the material facts of the case, just like they didn't interact with the original written memo. This is going to be the Zimmerman case of Silicon Valley. The hype just doesn't match what's on the ground.
-
Thanks for thread combine, Ben.
Wasn't me, but thanks to whoever did it. :)
In many ways, this also almost ties into the google fact checking thread. The bias seems very clear, and the defense of the bias from the usual suspects even clearer.
As the saying goes, just because you're paranoid...
-
Class action, huh? If it weren't for the fact that it was so long ago and the principals have retired or otherwise moved on, I'd like to join that suit.