Slashdot Mirror
Arnnon Geshuri, Newest Wikimedia Trustee, Forced To Resign
New submitter Mdann52 writes: Following an earlier vote of no confidence, it was announced that the recent appointee, Arnnon Geshuri, had stepped down from the board. This was following community criticism into his background. Says the announcement:
The Board Governance Committee is working to improve and update our
selection processes before we fill the vacancy left by Arnnonâ(TM)s departure.
We are sorry for the distress and confusion this has caused to some in our
community, and also to Arnnon.
I've looked through both of those articles, and I do not see any reference to social "justice" in either of them.
How is it even possible to discuss or describe this debacle without referring to social "justice", given how big of a role social "justice" had in this matter?
This incident fits all of the traits of a typical social "justice" angerfest:
1. Somebody does something that's actually quite minor. (Somebody gets appointed to a position of power. Or somebody mentions the word "dongle" to a friend. Or a police officer defends himself against a violent attacker who happens to have a different skin color.)
2. A small number of vocal opponents from the social "justice" movement object for whatever reason.
3. This small handful of vocal opponents from the social "justice" movement starts some non-binding petition or other useless bureaucratic construction.
4. Social media is used to rile up a bunch of other people who normally wouldn't give a fuck about what's going on, but who still want to feel that they're "making a difference" or "changing the world".
5. Despite claiming that it's wrong to single out a person and direct animosity toward this person, since doing so would be bullying, we see these social "justice" supporters single out the person and direct animosity toward them repeatedly. Yet they pretend it's not the bullying they're supposedly so very much against.
6. Typically within a few days, some new minor and pointless incident will catch the attention of the social "justice" supporters. They'll forget about everything they were angry about in the past, and they'll focus on this new issue for a day or two, until the next outrage comes along.
7. Slashdot reports on this pathetically irrelevant issue that nobody sensible actually cares about, well after the people who were originally outraged have forgotten that they were angry.
He was breaking the law. No hire agreements are illegal constraints of trade under a variety of antitrust acts. Not wanting to work with him based on that isn't an activist position, its not wanting to hire a criminal to a position of trust.
Oh jeez, can the new /. owners do anything about stupid mods that give +4 or +5 ratings to incredibly misinformed posts made by pontificating, self-righteous twits?
1) Geshuri did not create the no-hire policy that was agreed upon by Google, Apple and the other Silicon Valley companies. He was just an HR guy who followed his company's policies. It was CEO's like Eric Schmidt that instituted the policy in collusion with Steve Jobs and the other CEOs. Where's the boycott of the industries and products and votes of no confidence for them? Seriously if you've used any tech that is associated with all the companies that were included in the DOJ antitrust CIVIL action, you're a rank hypocrite.
2) The antitrust complaint was NOT a criminal investigation. Nobody was criminally charged, not even the companies. In fact, the DOJ settled the case with Google, et. al. with NO COMPANIES ADMITTING GUILT AND NO FINES WERE PAID. To this day, they don't acknowledge guilt from the DOJ action. So calling Geshuri a criminal just exposes you as a complete and uninformed moron.
3) The class action lawsuit that Google, Apple and the others settled last summer for $415 million (and $20 million for some) still didn't require them to admit wrong doing.
So laying this all the feet of some HR guy and trying to damage his reputation while the company he worked for that paid out millions that were already tucked away in fund so that the impact to Google's bottom line was essentially nil, is just disgusting
Jewish, I'm guessing, which makes the comments earlier in the thread about him just be an HR guy that was following orders darkly hilarious.