Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Reverses Stand on Discrimination Bill
sriram_2001 writes "Bowing to intense pressure both from outside as well as its employees, Microsoft has reversed its stand on the anti-discrimination bill. In a company wide email, Steve Ballmer says that though the Washington legislative session is over for the year, they'll support any such legislation in the future. However, he adds that they'll be supporting it in the US only as they don't want to involve the company in debates in countries with different cultures and value systems. He also says that he doesn't think Microsoft should be involved in most public policy issues." Announcement about the email's release on the Scobleizer main site.
Here's the full text of the email (with the spacing errors corrected).
____
~ |rip/\/\aster /\/\onkey
Only those which involve guaranteeing a continual source of piles of money large enough to roll around naked in.
i wonder where they stand on evolution/creation regarding monkey-man Ballmer...
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
no text
Good quote, too many chars. Seriously, the slashdot 120 char limit sucks!
And google is evil now? It's like bizaro slashdot.
In case anyone wants full confirmation, the email is also located on Microsoft's web site.
It's a good day for some of us Microsofties that were really upset at what happened.
"You know your god is man-made when he hates all the same people you do."
"...Unless the public policy in question is copyright or anti-trust law. Then we're all over it."
Schwab
Editor, A1-AAA AmeriCaptions
I'm bisexual, and I hate Microsoft.
But... frankly I just can't get myself to care about this particular issue. At all. We don't exactly *need* Microsoft's support. As long as they're not actually holding a stance *against* the discrimination bill, and they are using nondiscriminatory hiring practices themselves, I think that's just fine. Those that are not against us are for us (in this case more than many others). Honestly my response when Microsoft dropped their support of the bill was "well, it was awfully nice of them to support it up until the point where they stopped". Now, well, I'm not expecting Microsoft to take any action one way or the other on this bill, but it's nice of them that they will anyway.
There's plenty of companies who aren't taking a stand on this discrimination bill without anyone noticing; there's plenty of reasons to dislike Microsoft and their business practices without having to drag in minutiae of the actions of their lobbyists. Let it go.
We need to outphilanthropize M$!!
Freedom to oppress, or freedom from oppression?
"" How about taking the safety labels off everything, and let the stupidity-problem solve itself? """
retract_statement = true;
}
Did you ride the short bus? http://sh.ortb.us
The hidden glass ceiling at Microsoft is within Windows division. Though women and other minorities fare well in overall number and occupy leadership roles in other Microsoft groups, Windows Division seems to have a horrendous track record of hiring, retaining, and promoting minorities into senior positions (level 65 and above).
For a group of 14,000 people that has been around for decades and generates so much income, you'd think that they would have more than 25-30 women in senior leadership roles within the Windows group...
They need to concentrate on legislation that affects them. Going on these feel good campaigns will only get them into trouble, and as far as social issues, will only anger a bunch of people no matter what stance they take.
"He also says that he doesn't think Microsoft should be involved in most public policy issues"
Microsoft (or any other corporation) shouldn't be involved in ANY public policy issues, that's what elected representatives are for.
wtf, can anybody explain. Is this considered 'normal' in the US?
The only "public policy" Microsoft is involved in is exploits or malware for their OS occasionally bringing public agencies to their knees.
The State's legislative session is over for the year. Now that it no longer makes a difference, Microsoft switches back the high road as a P.R. move. Terrific. And all the press will praise Microsoft for their generosity, and the sheeple will love them again.
Blah.
Sorry Steve, but social responsibility is part of running a business. This is especially true for monopolies. Also interesting that they are willing to stake out the moral ground when it comes to intellectual property and freedom to innovate, but lack courage/conviction when it comes to other issues.
Someday a Slashdot ID of 177180 will mean something.
thunk it was a-gonna be the fine man's OS, an' not th' Fag Operatin' system, dawgone it. Them Fags dont need an OS of their own, as enny fool kin plainly see......Dawgone Fags need t'go an' haf their own place an stay away fum us straight fine christian types.....
"God of Rock, thank you for this chance to kick ass. "
So, if you have a country where "the different value system" endorses stuff like cutting off a girl's clitoris and sewing her vagina shut to ensure her virginity at marriage, Microsoft won't have a problem with that, because, well, it's a "different value system" and Microsoft doesn't want to get involved, and it might cost them some money.
China has a "different value system" that endorses the use of slave labor and politcal gulags. For that matter, Buchenwald was the result of a "different value system". Where does it end?
I think they picked the worst of two possible choices -- endorsing a squishy moral relativism in the name of cultural diversity that only serves to justify barbaric behavior, and it's all been done in the name of profits.
Maybe Bill should have stayed at Harvard and gotten a little better education.
It was also OK when they changed their minds. Reassessing your position and deciding that a given battle isn't your place is commendable, and I could appreciate that.
Now, though, they just plain suck. "Really, folks, even though it's too late to get this one bill passed, we'll sure lobby for the next one that comes along! Unless we don't! But never mind that; for now we can say that you have our full support without facing any of the consequences of doing so!"
What a horridly cynical, insulting position to take. Were I gay, I think I'd be far more furious at this latest flip-flop than at their earlier decision not to support it. At worst, that move just looked cowardly. This one appears flat-out manipulative.
I am a
[Ballmer] adds that they'll be supporting it in the US only as they don't want to involve the company in debates in countries with different cultures and value systems.
What about countries whose culture and value systems don't give any consideration to "intellectual" "property"? Will MS refrain from involvement in that debate too?
My next sig will be ready soon, but subscribers can beat the rush
No, let's protest against the real source of all that is wrong and evil in this world... Slashdot Anonymous Cowards!!!
Oh...wait...
Isn't this the same as the slashdot post two weeks ago, "Steve Ballmer Responds to Discrimination Issue?"
2 15235&tid=109&tid=103&tid=17
http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/04/24/1
...on same-story dupe policy.
The Stranger reports that a prominent gay employee has quit in the midst of all this. Weeks ago, they wrote that Microsoft was going to support the Washington legislation until a local minister, Ken Hutcherson of Antioch Bible Church in Redmond, threatened he would organize a nation wide boycott They also followed up with a story about the two parties later providing widely different versions of their meeting.
Microsoft is reverseing the reversal of their pro-gay rights policy.
excitingthingstodo.blogspot.com
not that there's anything wrong with that.
Offtopic but
I am wondering who typed this up, I mean how many words can you type together without noticing any typos?
I am Bennett Haselton! I am Bennett Haselton!
remember: Bill Gates was and IS the Big Brother. Microsoft is a monopoly virus. Who is really B.G.? This photo will explain all....
Then we got an article about how they reversed their stand and were ... they weren't OPPOSING it, but they were no longer supporting it.
Now they've reversed again.
Who cares? I thought the goal was to divorce corporate sponsorship from legislation? Or do we only want that when we find the legislation in question to be deplorable.
"I have never won a debate with an ignorant person." -Ali ibn Abi Talib
Mayor Diamond Joe Quimby at press conference...
Ever since I called for the rescue of that Simpson lad, I have taken a lot
of heat. So, I am flip-flopping! I say, let him stay down there!
Stop Computers/Cars Analogies on S
I like to give microsoft as much crap as the next guy, but I can't help but stand up for them on this. Make all the jokes you want -- but they're taking a stance on an issue they believe in, and for once it appears to be something that doesn't have many financial benefits to them (? does it?). *applause* for MS... even as much as I don't like them, I know that normally they're not doing anything that any other skilled capitalist wouldn't do (which is why I'm not a much of a capitalist... but that's another issue entirely). Anyway -- although its a little too late for them to support it now, I still have this much more respect for them now.
--- Caffeine is directly responsible for some of my greatest ideas, and some of my most embarrassing moments...
One point really stood out in all the e-mails you sent me. Regardless of where people came down on the issues, everyone expressed strong support for the company's commitment to diversity. To me, that's so critical. Our success depends on having a workforce that is as diverse as our customers - and on working together in a way that taps all of that diversity.
How does sexual-orientational diversity help a software company to produce better software? How exactly does Microsoft's success depend on such diversity? If any sort of diversity is relevant, wouldn't it be techincal diversity, or diversity of technical experience among its developers?
I mean this as a serious inquiry. For many years people have fought long and hard to show that someone should not be discriminated against because of his sexual orientation (or race, or other criteria irrelevant to a particular job). The country has made great strides against such discrimination. It seems that many of the same people who fought against discrimination are now saying that such criteria are not only relevant but are actually important to a company's success.
I don't get it. Someone please explain.
When did our enormous corporations decide they shouldn't be the only voice at the table in our government? I must've missed the memo. (Maybe that one got sent during the formulation of our energy policy, so Cheney thought it was a protected secret of the Executive Branch? Oops, that memo can't have come from those meetings...)
"Fundamentalism" isn't about divine morality. It's about human authority.
Slashdotters embrace Microsoft proving once and forall that the board is more about Liberalism than Geekism!
...should turn off any gay man (or straight woman for that matter).
I am very small, utmostly microscopic.
WTF? If their management is 64 levels deep, then Longhorn's release schedule makes much more sense. What are they trying to attain? The Org Chart of Yendor?
Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
Except for when they got involved with this in the first place by placing their initial support.
Hey M$, don't start nothin, won't be nothin.
-- I'm not a pessimist, I'm a realist. It's not my fault that life sucks so much. --
And how is your comment any different than me making an offensive joke about the homosexual lifestyle using stereotypes such as a lisp or a limp wrist? This is exactly the kind of thing that Microsoft says they're NOT going to tolerate.
-theGreater.Take a look at their political donatations:
http://buyblue.org/detail.php?corpId=143
They give a lot, to both parties, but mostly to the Republicans.
And anyway, aren't the bigots exactly the people you WANT to discriminate against? From what I've heard, it's a hell of a lot easier to stop being an asshole than to stop being gay.
On the other hand, I'm not gay but I am an asshole. Haven't been able to stop yet.
Visual Studio throws up a divide by zero error compiling the above algorithm...
The bought 2 electons, why shouldn't they be involved in politics.
GETPKG - Package Management for Slackware
And, based on the principles I've just outlined, the company should not and will not take a position on most other public policy issues, either in the US or internationally.
So... uh... I gotta ask Steve, why such a big interest in *this* issue? Just cause it's a feel-good policy to support?
If anything, people should be judged on merit alone, not skin color, not race, not religion. I'd expect a Christian like myself to work on Sunday (10 commandments are Jewish law, in case you forgot) if I needed them to. This kind of stuff is something we've generally accepted for around a decade already, yet we're still fscking talking about it. Only now it's a PR move
This legislation was created late on purpose, so that when the legislative session ended, it'd be canned. There's no real activity, yet you'd get to see all the big-name companies hurting for diversity in their ranks talk heartily about their positive steps toward diversity. And now none of them actually have to do a damn thing.
If you really want to see real improvements in diversity: QUIT TALKING ABOUT IT.
Instead, judge people on the work they do (wow, what a concept!). If someone of the same race or religion as you gets fired for slacking off, don't fscking defend them! Don't encourage them to sue for discrimination. Tell them they were slacking off and are using a pitiful excuse to make your life worse.
Now we have employers that are afraid to hire someone of another color or rare religion because they are liable to sue when they *do* have to fire them. How the hell is that helping those of us of various skin color or religion trying to get jobs based on MERIT alone? "Oh, don't hire the Norwegians, they slack off and then complain about discrimination!"
Yes, there is *still* discrimination in the workplace, but it's more based on neptitism and favoritism than racism and gender issues. We don't live in the sixties anymore, the people that are doing the hiring got sprayed with fire hoses and attended peace rallies when they were kids. The people that focus on discrimination like it's a huge problem are often the most vile, unethical, and least work-hardy individuals I know.
If race or religion is an issue to you when I'm doing the hire, I'm going to move on to someone whose thinking about impressing me to get the job instead. You don't say things like: "I noticed that you don't have a lot of people of X color/religion, what are you doing to improve that?" Work is work, you become part of the "family" based upon what you can do for us.
Yes, because the US has so much better values opposed to gays/lesbians. *rolls eyes*
What always makes me laugh is the ignorance of the general population when it comes to politics. Let's look at the most logical set of events that occurred.
More than likely Microsoft supported the initial bill because it fit within their social agenda and contained provisions that Microsoft either found beneficial for business or found to be "the right thing." In the process of going through the legislature, the bill changed. Perhaps addditional clauses were appended to it, removed from it, or the document otherwise changed into a less beneficial bill. Microsoft removes it's support either ebcause the bill does not have the original impact or because it does them harm in a business sense.
However, the population hears "Pro-Gay Bill" and without reading anything about it or how it has morphed, they instanly support it. They build public pressure for MS to support it in any form or revision. What happens when the enacted law does nothing (like the emancipation proclimation) or has ill effects (like the DMCA)? Guess who will get the bad PR of supporting it. I think MS should have stuck to their guns and been more open about why they felt justified to drop their support for the bill. Just because the world is full of less than informed people, does not mean that the dissenting view is incorrect.
http://politics.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/04/ 21/162247&tid=109&tid=219 2 15235&tid=109&tid=103&tid=17
http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/04/24/1
So, if Ballmer thinks they should stay out of public policy, will they backdown from that as well? Or is 'business' policy a different animal in their view?
The levels start at 58 for historical reasons. Several years ago they wanted to change the level system. They started the new level system way above the old system to avoid confusion with the old level numbers.
... the government got out of the marraige business for hetero couples?
I think most gay rights activists would be perfectly happy if the government only granted civil unions, for straight or gay couples, and left marraige to the church.
"I'll have a Guinness, no wait, make that a Coors Light" -Grad student I work with, who shall remain anonymous...
That's not reversing. They're previous position was neutral. To take up a pro-bill position instead of neutral is just to take a position.
It would be reversing only if they had been *opposed* to the bill before.
This is not surprising. Everyone knows 90% of Microsoft's programers are gay
This reminds me of a discussion I had the other day when a friend of mine (who is a raging liberal) who sort of said off the cuff that it would be okay to discriminate against republicans by not letting them vote like we ban the natzies and communists (okay she's not really up on the actual voting laws in the USA).
;^)
Ignoring for a moment countering that bit of misinformation, I asked her why might it be okay to discriminate against someone for what they believe? She quickly responded and said it was because republicans were evil since they discriminated against blacks, gays, and poor folks and had to be stopped so we can win our country back.
I guessing that's the pot calling the kettle... (or some sort of twisted descriminatory affirmative action metaphor).
Anyhow, back to the normal bashing...
Corporations are good at one thing: providing goods and services in exchange for money as profitably as they can. They should be held responsible to operate according to the law - ie not to screw people over, but trying to make them responsible for any thing else is foolish and doomed to fail. I don't want the corporations to be responsible for creating/lobbing for labor laws as you suggest - they have a vested interest that may very likely not be in the interest of the workers.
The same goes for about everything. I don't want them to responsible for protecting the environment - an independent group without vested interests should be doing that. I don't want my employer to be responsible for my retirement - who knows if they will still be around then? I don't want companies responsible for all the things that unions demand out of them - it only burdens them and makes them less competitive abroad.
If you think that everyone is deserving of some level of pension or health care, then that is a job for the government, not companies. And for any level above that I would much rather be free to choose my own savings and insurance plan on an open market, than be locked into one picked by my employer.
There is no one institute that is the solution to all our societal needs and problems. The task of providing goods and services as efficiently as possible is beneficial to society in and of itself and the competitive market does a much better job at it than any sort of monopoly, including the government. But corporations suck at other things. Demanding that they take initiative to be socially responsible may satisfy a visceral desire to lash out against them, but it achieves no good practical results. Let the market do what the market is good at, and let the government do what government is good at.
The Bush White House is totally on Microsoft's dick.
Were I gay,[. . .]
Your user mnemonic is "Little Pink Bunny." Male or female, just what kind of idiots do you take us for?
: )
Yeah !
Yeah, I really hate the endless grinding for experience points in trying to get to the next level in Microsoft. But I hear that once you hit level 60, you can gain the power "Mastery of Monopoly" which makes the spells you cast against startup companies do double damage, and reduces the damage from attacks by the Department of Justice. Combined with the Orb of Marketshare, you're virtually invincible.
I can imagine Microsoft's response to the reverend's claims that he stopped Microsoft.
"Fuck this asshole - we'll back every anti-discrimination bill we see, just to spite this piece of shit! No one pushes us around!"
Even if that really was their motivation, in this case, the ends justify the means. Glad to see MS picking this particular ball back up, even if it's after the fact.
I think it's a bit eerie that you're dating yourself
I tried that carbon dating once, but they were always either as hard as diamonds, or were so flakey they made a charcoal-coloured mess everywhere.
What right do Microsoft have to interfere with public policy? The fact that a large company can have *any* effect on policymaking on Capitol Hill seems to be worse than non-separation of church and state. This appears to be a breakdown of public procedure to me.
Their employees are passionate about their work. They're looking to recruit people who are passionate about software. Now they send passionate emails. Their salary raises must be based on how many times they use the word 'passionate'.
Other Issues
Now that we have that gay issue out of the way I know there are some other public statements we have made recently that need our attention is this crazy new blog world we live in. With more than half the company now spending their days taking pot-shots at their employer (me) either openly or anonymously there is almost no "right" way for us to come down on any issue. Take for example Bill's recently statements on immigration, public education and so on. We are setting Bill up with his own internal blog where he can express such, um, insightful ideas, in the future.
In the mean time, so as not to offend anyone we are coming down squarely on both sides of every issue we can from now on. We will be dividing the campus into quadrants with employment practices as follows: The west-most building will be our gay-friendly zone, and the east will be the more traditional "family values" area. The northern parts of the campus will hire mostly H1B visa holders while the south will take an America First point of view with respect to hiring decisions. The lower floors of each building will continue to favor hiring guys and the upper floors will hire mostly female workers, as we don't want any criticisms about a glass ceiling. Bill will be moved downstairs as we know he doesn't deal with female authority figures very well.
We will have to subdivide the campus further as other social issues arise, or as Bill or I shoot off our mouths prematurely in the future. At some point the low-rise architecture we have chosen will probably have to give way to something more flexible.
To me, this situation underscoresthe importance of having clearly-defined principles on which we base ouractions. We will do everything we can to avoid taking a firm position on anything, so that we can be true to our one core principal, which is that software should cost consumers a whole heck of a lot more than it costs us to produce it.
Steve
For it is he, with his fairly obvious observations, posted as text and xml, sorted by descending date, who will one day break the back of discrimination and human suffering.
That and a lot of shakily video-taped giggling.
I take exception to that.
Or mabye I don't.
____
~ |rip/\/\aster /\/\onkey
They were not distracted by such nonsense. Diversity never wrote good code.
I would be pissed if my employees were using their email and my bandwidth to discuss Gay rights. The mere fact that this is going on at Microsoft is a very bad sign.
How about more coding, less bitching about how Microsoft feels about what should be someone's personal business. I'm no fan of bigotry, but a corporate workplace is not the place for email storms of this nature.
I wonder how many emails were generated during the same time period discussing how much Longhorn SUCKS?
If it's the right thing, then its the right thing everywhere at every time. If it's not the right thing everywhere, then it's never the right thing. This is a single planet we all are standing on, and we're all one people.
(Note to Senate Republicans: Read the above and realize that, if Judicial Filibusters are wrong, then they're always wrong and you should eliminate them for all times and all parties. They're not just wrong when you're the party in power.)
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
Reading about this radical conservative preacher putting pressure on M$ was making me sick. In fact, I'm sick of ALL these religious nut jobs in our country trying to steamroll their fucking agenda everywhere we look. Last time I checked, we weren't living in a theocracy.
Gates and Co. should have told this idiot to take his Bible and shove it up is arse. If religious zealots don't like gay people, then don't engage in homosexual activities and leave everyone else alone.
you'd think that they would have more than 25-30 women in senior leadership roles within the Windows group...
Maybe the women don't want the jobs?
To a woman, having a leadership role in a software company is like proclaiming oneself to be the Chief Nerd Officer.
=PJust how many managers does a single product line require?
For a group of 14,000 people that has been around for decades
Had to promote anyone if everyone stays. No openings.
Or maybe women feel Windows is not their future.
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
So Steve, are you going after China next? They don't seem too upset about Microsoft piracy ...
but they DO do forced abortions
kill children based on their gender
value males over females.
How's that sensitivty rule work again?
What right does a legal monopoly with a long history of dubious and unethical legal practices have to tell U.S. citizens what they can and cannot believe about sexual behavior or to crush what they do believe with federal/state laws bought with their billions in ill-gotten assets.
This is classic Microsoft behavior--a nasty blend of coercion and greed. What next? Is Ballmer, having defined for himself what is legitimately "American," going to fund an UnAmerican Activities Committee and persecute everyone who disagrees with The Microsoft Way of Sex.
And, based on the principles I've just outlined, the company should not and will not take a position on most other public policy issues, either in the US or internationally. and I strongly disagree with Bill or Steve's position on pending legislation. (Bill's H1b visa comments come to mind) I would rather not have MS or any other company I hold stock in involved in any way.
RE: Adding ID card Bill to Supporting Troops Bill
-1: Offtopic, killed....
In the last story I had made a crack about the good M$ news not being newsworthy, but here it is.
Congrats to Microsoft! Fighting for equal rights is always cool by me.
I'm also liking the discussion of whether this is the proper role of companies. I argue that it is, but that such a bill being passed is actually *counter* to Microsoft's (or any other company that does *not* discriminate) best interests.
If I run Software company X, and I don't want to hire gay people, I'm artificially limiting my supply of employees. I'm overpaying for my supply because of this fact. Company Y, guided by a rational hand, now has a pool of folks who cannot work at X, and therefore has a larger pool of labor to choose from. Basically, Y gains a benefit for being smart (in history, this had problems, because everyone was stupid in the same way at the same time, hence the original laws that prevent you from firing a black person for being black).
Anyway, the point is, it's actually *against* their best interest to see their enlightened hiring practices spread far and wide (to their competitors). Cynically, they perhaps hope that the good reputation they gain will more than offset this, but it could just be because they believe it's the right thing to do. Certainly some of them do.
Linux all the way, supports all races, creeds, and religious rights.
http://www.lesbian.mine.nu/ -- Lesbian GNU/Linux -- Nuff said.
or
http://www.mslinux.org/ -- For those who dont want to convert, or are in the closet about their love of linux. Redneck Uneducated Tobacco Chewin types that really are gay, and just dont accept themselves typically fall into this group.
"God of Rock, thank you for this chance to kick ass. "
homosexuality is a crime against God!
Viral software licensing is not freedom, it is in fact GNU/Socialism.
See the horrible fate that befalls someone foolish enough to break the chain letter?!
the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
I see where you are coming from, but I can't totally agree with you. Crushes on lesbians tend to go unrequited ;)
http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/04/24/1
http://politics.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/04
And perhaps more importantly, the reason that Simpsons has never mentioned scientology - Nancy Cartwright, the voice of Bart Simpson.
How I feel about the issue doesnt matter; I want the companies that I invest in to have the largest audience possible. Does Microsoft think that the Right wing users no longer matter to their bottom line? If so, they are nuts.
They never should have taken a public position one way or the other, and because they did, they lose one audience or another in the process. This is stupid corporate policy at best. I repeat Microsoft, just shut the fuck up and code. I would not be surprised if a large part of Microsoft's customer base was out today picking up some RedHat to see what this Linux thing was all about.
Businesses should never get into these kinds of arguments. I would not want to be the Microsoft Rep responsible for selling into Utah or Idaho tomorrow. (huge generalization, I know)
C++ doesnt give a rats ass what color you are or who you like to fuck. You can code or you cant code, period.
...the power to use a +25 Successful Protest of Monopolistic Practices and a +14 Immediate Conversion of Software to Open Source, I won't be concerned.
I'll just slowly work towards level 99. If I die before then, I'm sure my parents will use one of the three other savestates that weren't stuck in the Surprisingly Tough Citywide College System dungeon.
You can hold down the "B" button for continuous firing.
The orignal stated reason for backing off on the bill as that MS would be staying out of politics, unless it related to their business. So copyright or patent law or other things like that, are in their intrests to be involved in and they have a duty to their shareholders to do so. This, however, doesn't affect their business directly since they are still free to have an anti-discrimination policy (which they do) regardless of the way the bill goes.
Personally I don't think that's a bad stance for a company to take. Basically just say "Look, we aren't interested in playing politics on random legslation, regardless of our personal views. We'll only be active in things that deal with our business directly."
...I hate it when large corporations refuse to get involved in politics.
Last week when they dropped support, the daily show showed the Steve Balmer explanation being typed, up pops "Clipy":
Clipy says: You seem to be composing a lame cop out, would you like some help??
You probably had to see it, but it was funny. It was the LOL moment in the show for me.
Never Underestimate the Power of Stupid People in Large Groups..
he makes no mention of state legislation; the bill was drafted in Washington state.
i wonder how soon we can expect federal legislation in support of gay rights?
They start at 58 only for technical positions. They actually start somewhere in the early 50s. I know that FT receptionists and admins start off at 52 or so.
Okay, I'm sure that there are at least a few people here that hate gays, even though Slashdot is, with respect to social values, fairly liberal.
I can easily understand why you might be embarassed to admit that you're coding C# for a MS/.NET environment.
But I can't figure out why you think that people here would hate you for being an athiest, a liberal (okay, except for the vocal libertarian Slashdot contingent if you mean liberal in the sense of supporting big government), or being intelligent.
Godwin's Law's Corollary:
Those who invoke Godwin's Law generally do so because they lack an effective counterargument.
Businesses should never get into these kinds of arguments. I would not want to be the Microsoft Rep responsible for selling into Utah or Idaho tomorrow. (huge generalization, I know)
As Sandeep Kaushik reported in the April 21st iss of The Stranger
The list of high-profile companies that endorsed the bill this year reads like a who's who of the Pacific Northwest corporate world. It includes the Boeing Company, Nike, Coors Brewing, Qwest Communications, Washington Mutual, Hewlett-Packard, Corbis, Battelle Memorial Institute, Microsoft cofounder Paul Allen's Vulcan Inc., and others. And as late as February 1, Microsoft, which issued a letter in support of the bill last year, appeared poised to do so again.
Notice that there's been nary a peep about any of these other comapanies. Perhaps it's the waffling and ham-handed handling of the issue that is Microsoft's real problem.
One of the biggest problems we've created for ourselves is making companies simply about making money. I think Chuck Palahniuk's Tyler Durden best expressed the inhuman calculations that leads to. Sure, investors deserve to know that the financial instrument they're investing in is out to make money, but if Google hasn't been delisted for it's preface to the company's S1 document perhaps other comapnies can profess something beyond "doing the right thing" only in the narrowest of definitions for its shareholders.
Further, it is in Microsoft's best interest, talent pool-wise, to make sure that Washington State is and remains attractive to gays, bohemians, and ethnic minorities because they are also the places where creative workers - the kind who start and staff innovative, fast-growing companies - want to live.
And another Christian stands up, waves a bunch of nice-sounding but irrelevant-to-the-article claptrap around to cover the fact that he supports persecution of a large group of people.
You know what I really like about Christian persecution of homosexuals? There's almost no support in the Bible for it. Jesus didn't say "see how miserable you can make gays and lesbians" -- the handful of references to homosexuality dealt with pederasty, not the form of homosexuality that is at issue in today's American society. There were a bunch of Old Testament Jewish religious law requirements -- say, Deuteronomy and Leviticus -- the sort of stuff that sits next to "if someone gets sick, they have to be blessed by a priest three times a day and sit in river water" type nonsense and bans on eating pork. All that stuff is ignored these days by Christians, with the isolated exception of the references to homosexuality.
What happened to you man... it used to be about ruthlessly crushing your opponents.
In America, you spam computers In Soviet Russia, computers spam you!
the guy's intent is obviously humor...
Tech Public Policy stuff
Buy MS software ... it sucks and you can contribute to theocracy in America with every license fee.
Of course, these are good things to some of the people around here.
Tech Public Policy stuff
Deciding who can and can't get into educational programs -- now, that's a different story!
He also says that he doesn't think Microsoft should be involved in most public policy issues.
This is such crap. Corporations, from the very beginning, have been completely intertwined with public affairs. They are more powerful than governments to your average citizen. They have massive social responsibility. Honestly, I have respect for Microsoft's software. I don't use it, but it can do some neat tricks. But this - this is unforgivable. I wonder if Ballmer even has a soul.
"Homosexuals! Homosexuals! Homosexuals!"
So, it's a good thing in the US, but "other cultures" might have a different take, so let's not rile them up? That strikes me as a gutless stand. If this were 1938, would Microsoft be against killing jews, but only say so in the US?
...the original quote came from some famous lesbian leader. Can't remember her name of the exact quote, something about a huge sum of money and wanting to strip and either roll or bathe naked in it.
Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
I am never, ever going to understand you guys.
It's left over from the Cold War, and our insecure need to feel superior to the Soviet Union. We spent decades rationalizing how socialism is horrible and capitalism is the end-all-and-be all economic system, nevermind that this country wasn't founded upon it nor is it mentioned anywhere in the Constitution. Aside from economics, one of the other telling examples of this inferiority complex is the Pledge of Allegance. The phrase "under god" wasn't inserted in a rounding display of faith, it was inserted because the U.S.S.R. was opposed to religion, and was an anti-communist display.