Slashdot Mirror
Google Engineers Are Organizing A Walk Out To Protest The Company's Protection Of An Alleged Sexual Harasser (buzzfeednews.com)
In response to a story about Google paying and protecting former executive Andy Rubin following an investigation into sexual misconduct, a group of 200 Google employees are organizing a "women's walk." From a report: A group of more than two hundred engineers at Google are organizing a company-wide "women's walk" walkout for later this week to protest recent revelations about the search giant's protection of employees that had allegedly engaged in sexual misconduct, according to four people familiar with the situation inside Google. The protest, which is expected to happen on Thursday, comes in light of a story by the New York Times last week into the misbehavior of Android creator Andy Rubin and other executives at the company, some of whom still have positions of prominence at Google. Google gave Rubin a reported $90 million exit package in 2014, following an investigation into an allegation that he had coerced another employee to perform oral sex on him. That investigation reportedly found that allegation to be credible.
I'd be happy to take a position at Google. And I won't spend more time on SJW virtue signaling than I do on my job.
...that the march is decidedly white. ain't no-one risking their h1b over shit like this
I'd fire them.
Since the company essentially fired Rubin, I'm not sure what protection they gave him.
The previous story made it sound as though the money was actually through stock options or some other benefits package that he'd previously negotiated in order to stay with the company. Unless Google had some kind of morals clause as a part of that, they wouldn't have any good reason to deprive him of what they had already negotiated.
So the company investigated a report (i.e., they didn't just brush it off), removed Rubin after finding the allegation credible (i.e., merely likely enough to have happened), and paid him what he was owed based on previous negotiations. I'm not sure what Google did wrong in any of this to warrant a protest by anyone. Normally this is the type of shit that just gets covered up, so Google should be getting praised by the people protesting this if anything.
Probably gonna be downvoted to hell but I don't care.
What's with all this witch-hunting nowadays? Notice how many things in this story are nothing but a pure speculation: "allegedly engaged", "a reported $90 million exit package", "an allegation", "reportedly found that allegation to be credible".
Nothing in this story has been proven. There's never been a lawsuit. Nothing has officially been revealed.
First, it was Hollywood actors and even directors. Now, CEOs or high ranking officers. Can anyone name a single instance of relatively recent sexual harassment allegation to be conclusively proven in the court of law?
I'm not trying to downplay this story or say that women are never oppressed/sexually harassed at work. I just want such stories to become a tad more factual than they've been so far. Someone said something to someone and now the whole Internet is buzzing about it. What the hell?
I'm not a woman, of course, but why on Earth at least a number of rape victims seek legal counsel, press charges and somehow act on the harassment in a provable manner while this recent witch-hunting has been fueled by pure speculations and seemingly nothing else?
Bye bye.
why everyone is suddenly coming out of the woodwork with all of the SJW/soyboy/homo/tranny crap? Is there something is their water?
Is there anyone more coddled than the american female? It's Sisyphean in a way. All she wants is respect, but all she gets is more deference and catering (a sure sign of being patronized and not respected). The boys don't even respect her enough to apply consequences when she walks out or performs any number of histrionics. They let the gals stomp around in their flats, content knowing that they'll be back in line in a day or two. What a time to be a woman. Equal indeed.
"Alleged" used to mean not convicted. When did that change?
Don't get me wrong if he did it hang him out to dry but unless proven it is still just an allegation he should be afforded any rights he previously had.
No innocent until proven guilty, no jury of equals, no rule of law, only mob justice. And that's supposed to hold the moral high ground? Why don't they just walk to his house and lynch him, if it's so bad...
Absolutely no one should be surprised when China quickly takes over the United States as world tech leader.
To quote/paraphrase a vile and toxic SJW:
"you made your SJW bed. Now get fucked in it" Google.
Am I missing something? Are Google engineers part of a union? If not, fire them all. But keep the guy that can talk someone into sucking his dick. He's a perfect fit for an advertising company.
Protesting without an actual list of what you want changed is idiotic. It's the adult equivalent of a temper tantrum. Rational people think about a situation they find problematic, and come up with a solution. So what is it?
If you don't have a solution, and all you want to do is express outrage (and then do so), you're part of the problem. All that will happen is that Google will wait for this to quiet down, and then go back to business as usual.
Protest is a TERRIBLE form of change, and never accomplishes much of anything. Look at the Occupy Wall Street people. A classic example of people outraged, but had no real tangible message or tangible things they wanted different. 7 year later, and zippo has changed. We've actually gone BACKWARDS!
Spend any time looking through the Android source code, and you'll quickly lose any respect you might have for Googlers.
Fire them for insubordination and give them a bad review when future employers call.
He's one of the (((chosen ones))).
It's just the expected result when you constantly appease the left. They are never satisfied with whatever concessions they receive. It is just the standard rule-book of the blackmailer and now Google is left with dealing with the consequences.
They would be much better off by firing the lot of them. It will mean some pain in the short term, but a much better outlook for the company in the future. Unfortunately, this kind of shit has gotten seriously out of hand of late and I don't think they have the testicular fortitude to deal with it appropriately.
Also having underlings to give you blow jobs at the office is no longer considered professional behavior.
I've read stuff like this every once in awhile at Google. Somebody comes clean and cleans out the dirty laundry. What's a walk out going to do? Maybe draw attention briefly on something that happened years ago? If this stuff happens why do you work for Google if it offends you so much? Maybe for the nice paycheck and early retirement? Let's be the self proclaimed moral fabric of Google at least for a brief moment.
Google's got over 85,000 employees. Probably half of them in the various south bay campuses. Two hundred being gone for a day isn't going to be noticed. Though I imagine eng-misc@ and industryinfo@ and memegen might be a little quieter.
If the guy is found to be actually a piece of shit who sexually harasses women, and the company protects him, then I would support these people. If they are protesting with just allegations, then they should be fired.
If you write it into every Google employment contract that compensation can withheld (to the tune of tens of millions of dollars) the quiet, little internal "investigation" now becomes a matter of civil tort, and all the parties involved (including the women who filed the original complaint) risk being hauled into open court, where the standards of evidence are much, much starker than #MeTooHonestToGod "women mostly tell the truth about these things".
So you can have the quiet, internal investigation which results in people losing their employment (in an at-will employment environment, this is hard to litigate), but not their compensation (in law, property is the giant bull's-eye cake, and all the rest is merely icing); or, all the women of Google can form a giant support group to collectively get their courtroom Anita Hill on.
Andy Rubin already lives in a world where his name will summon up allegations of sexual misdeeds for all time.
Unlike many overpaid executives, I wouldn't be the least bit surprised that Andy Rubin delivered immense corporate value for that giant pay packet.
These women know they can't successfully sue Rubin in civil court (their largely anecdotal evidence is insufficient for that venue), or they would take their grievance there, and profit immensely.
So now they are trying to intimidate their employer, Google, to extract a huge financial penance on scant documentary evidence, in a ratio that no court in America would countenance.
I've seen this drama before.
Why the Stanford Judge Gave Brock Turner Six Months — 17 June 2016
Ana Kasparian: Stanford Rapist Barely Punished — 6 June 2016
Seriously, Ana Kasparian thinks that Brock Turner was "barely punished".
Actual outcome: Instantly demoted from a Stanford golden child, to a lifelong felon, having served a big chunk of actual jail time (six months in the slammer in the pink petticoat for a socially maladapted Stanford nerd is not small change), whose given name is now synonymous with "dumpster rape" on the Internet for all time, and is barely employable, anywhere, ever (except on false pretenses where he dishonestly conceals his sordid history) because the social media wrath of the Sorority Sisters against any "clean slate" employer who ever associates with this person for all time would be too vituperative to even contemplate. All this for an act committed as a socially mindless young male not yet brutally familiar with neither alcohol nor women.
That's a whole new definition of "barely punished" that would make a cross-dressing Spanish Inquisitor cackle with glee.
Women who complain about their PMS affecting their mood and behaviour have no freaking clue about the brain-cramping rampage of peak TSB in a young man's late teenage years.
We've known ever since Robert Trivers first wagged around the magic, sexual-emotion clue stick that the chips in male evolution are stacked far higher, and far narrower than for women, and thus it only stands to reason that the hormonal ravages are correspondingly more intense.
Every woman who has ever said "my eyes are up here" to a man under the age of twenty-five has noticed this herself, without bothering her pretty head to write down and solve the underlying reproductive equation.
[*] TSB = toxic sperm build-up
We get it. We're about 3000 years overdue for a sea change on society's general tolerance of sexual misbehaviour (which is predominantly, but not exclusively, a male crime).
The attitudes must change.
Nevertheles
All the expected comments.
Job Search Out, Bing Out, Azure Dive, Oracle File, Vivaldi Divaldi, AWS Tumble, IBM Dressup-and-a-song, Alibaba Hug-the-mama..
They had the option to do the whole you come in to work and find your desk and a security guard out on the lawn.
But did they really have that option when no formal charges were ever fired, and Rubin himself disputes the whole thing (claiming it was something his Ex-Wife made up to improve her position in divorce proceedings).
I'd say Google did what it reasonably could, got rid of him while at the same time allowing for the possibility the charges were false.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Sheesh! We old hippies would have held a sit-in instead of a walk-out.
At least there's a cafeteria with free stuff inside.
"'womans' walk" is sexist. It implies only women are sexually harassed at work. If I were an employee of Google I'd file a complaint against the organizers.
The money paid may have been a contract buy out. We may never know since facts are no longer important in SJW America. I agree that 200 engineers won't make a dent. It shouldn't even be news, other than the story seems intended to make men in power look bad.
Such contracts typically do not require a criminal conviction to fire someone for cause. And typically it's firing for cause that stops golden parachutes.
They're angry about one douchebag getting special treatment but totally silent about their entire corporation helping enhance the dystopian technopanopticon of the Chinese Communist state with Project Dragonfly.
Hey Google, how about leave and stay out until you grow a fully functioning conscience again.
Because if they didn't, they would leave trails like slugs on the sidewalk.
Many professionals get that treatment without even an allegation of wrong doing.
Other than putting their employer in bad light this makes no sense to me. How about writing an internal letter to Sundar Pitchai or the board, if there are reasons to be upset? Or just quit citing the problem. That would gain some effective PR. This just seems silly and childish as many hashtag (pseudo) feminist actions these days. I honestly don't get it.
Our is it just some teenie service personnel looking for attention?
We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
"Under the Justinian Codes and English common law, the accused is presumed innocent in criminal proceedings, and in civil proceedings (like breach of contract) both sides must issue proof."
His employment was terminated, as allowed by contract. His guilt or innocence is not subject to review. He's not being charged with a crime, so the rest of your argument flies out the window.
Yeah it must be terrifying to get 90 million and be nowhere near this huffy little march.
Clearly you don't want your job. So walk, and keep walking.
Depending on who decides to walk out, productivity might even go UP. I know I get more done when I'm not being constantly bugged by engineers who are more concerned about talking politics.
There was no evidence of job favoritism or threats; merely two adults mutually playing around.
That is not how sexual harassment works, even back then it was understood to create a hostile workplace. When a boss and a subordinate have a consensual affair the other subordinates fear there will be favoritism. This fear is real. It negatively effects retention, productivity, etc; it makes employees hate the workplace, their boss, their fellow employees, etc; it creates a risk of lawsuits for the company.
Again, this is not some new radical SJW interpretation. This is what has been taught in sexual harassment training since the 1990s.
I'd be happy to take a position at Google. And I won't spend more time on SJW virtue signaling than I do on my job.
Same here. Pity California is not a 'right to work' state. They would be canned as soon as they walked out the door....
CA is an "at will employment" state. An employer "may terminate an employee for any reason at any time" unless there is a law or contract preventing the "reason" from being used. So unless their employment contracts allows them to abandon their work duties during assigned work hours Google should have no problem firing them, in theory, political correctness aside.
My memory is different: "hostile work environment" that didn't involve favoritism or threats didn't become commonplace until a bit after.
Either way, I would agree to some degree of punishment for such as long as it's enforced consistently between parties so that it's not used as a political weapon.
Table-ized A.I.
They don't hire your kind. SJW virtue signalling and advertising are their priorities. Search hasn't improved in over 10 years - they're done with building software.
Google (and Facebook) wants to encourage virtue signaling and advertising, it lets them create a better profile on you, so that they can sell more targeted advertising tailored to your preferences.
Before you interview your applicants, you can either:
A) Decide you will hire the most skilled / qualified person
or
B) Decide you will hire the person with the favored genitals or complexion
Choice B is called a "diversity hire".
If you set out to hire the most qualified person, it's not a diversity hire, by definition.
My memory is different: "hostile work environment" that didn't involve favoritism or threats didn't become commonplace until a bit after.
Either way, I would agree to some degree of punishment for such as long as it's enforced consistently between parties so that it's not used as a political weapon.
I recall the corporation I worked for when I learned that a consensual affair creates a hostile workplace, it was an unintuitive concept to me at the time. I left that company in the early 90s. Perhaps our HR department was cutting edge.
Things were looking really good over there for a while. But then they got a communist dictator for life, the social credit score turned out to be as horrific as the fear-mongers said, and they've had decades of explosive growth that's come to an end. They have a new middle class that wants to get paid for their labor. They've made strides in air pollution at least, but it was straight-up killing people at crazy-bad levels.
Oppression comes in a lot of different forms. Moving to china would not improve your liberty.
And when you're done with your women's walk... just keep on walking.
Many comments here only prove one thing, people have double standards, and when someone of a group people here believe they belong to get accused they call the accuser SWJ and lair. Then state the person being accused should continue in his position of power.
But when a Priest is accused of the same thing, the very same people who are defending these other abusers are out there with pitch forks and torches looking for him.
It is time we start taking the accuser seriously instead of defending the accused, maybe it is time to take a lesson from Europe and try to keep names and details out of the press. And if the abuser has a position of power, put them on unpaid leave until proof can be determined one way or the other. If proof is found, the abuser should be fired and loose any existing options owed to him.
Google's new motto: Be evil!
And do NOT vote for Gavin Newsom who has sexual misconduct in his own past. Nah, who am I kidding, it's SJWs in the Bay, they'll ignore that because he's the "correct" kind of guy...
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
So...get to it...protest.
Hello fellow (((white male)))
I see you have not yet learned how ineffective calling your ideological opponents virgins is.
Yes, I'm sure you slay all kinds of virtual pussy, kiddo. That's why you anonymously brag on the internet about it.
You need to step up your game, schlomo.
When people start protesting and walking off the job because "accusations have been made and I don't think enough punishment of what I think it appropriate has been meted out" they should be summarily dismissed with prejudice.
Wording of original reporting was:
âoeshe agreed to meet him at a hotel, where she said he pressured her into oral sex, they said. The incident ended the relationship.â
There is no additional public information of any kind related to this account. It has not been released what he is alleged to have specifically done to "pressure" her assuming the allegation itself is correct.
People (including SJW extraordinaire AmiMoJo's baseless idiocy) are running around assuming without evidence this means an assault or rape occurred when we don't know specifically what he is alleged to even have done to pressure her let alone the issue of whether the allegation itself is accurate.
At least when people were hung or stoned to death for witchcraft there was at least a telling of what they were alleged to have done. Here we don't even have that.
California! Yeahhhhhhh.
No but seriously. This is California for you
Google employees throwing a butt-hurt, SJW-virtue-signaling-temper-tantrum? You are shitting me. Great! Send in your resumes, folks!
For the love of god, what is wrong with this if no violence, blackmail or any kind of treat has been involved?
Google has ever more stale product offerings with little innovations or new products being more than a toy in top line revenue terms.
Ads on web sites - stale
Youtube ads - stale
Android - commodity
Android app store revenue - stable
1,000 small projects / inventions / technologies - not meaningful to top line revenue
Paid music or video streaming on Youtube - maybe - but commodity now and in the long run
Apart from Amazon's selling physical goods to most everywhere, Google, MS, Apple (4 product company) have small reasons to be long term positive on their business prospects.
Expect Google to be more of a utility company with good revenues
It's same as car manufacturer producing a dud of a car and selling only marginal at best new features like visor lights
Comrade, where is your sash? Directive 572.34b requires that members of the Junior Anti-Sex League wear their sash at all times when in public.
Comrade, where is your sash? Directive 572.34b requires that members of the Junior Anti-Sex League wear their sash at all times when in public.
Oh silly little boy, there is no prohibition on sex among coworkers. There is merely a prohibition between a superior and a subordinate. Fear not, when you get older and join the workforce you may still have a chance to get laid.
Pure taught bullshit. Means nothing if the SJW fanatics pimp their masturbation fantasy. If ya can't take-the-fuck ... then practice yo suck. Snowflake. Otherwise get on with your work and shut up.
No. We're just going to make GayBLT sexuality illegal again. Which is a real shame - there are plenty of nice gay folks, and most of us don't give a shit who you want to fuck.
But if you anti-hetero Nazi wingnuts are going to run persecution campaigns against straight men - and disingenuously claim that normal human sociosexuality is "abusive" - well shit bro, we're gonna persecute you right back.
You may soon discover why it's a bad idea for a small minority of degenerates to harass and threaten the overwhelming majority of the population.
The only problem with that sort of policy is that once you reach a certain level of promotion, everybody is your subordinate, so if you aren't married by then, you're basically taking a vow of celibacy by accepting the promotion.
A more sensible approach is to not allow people to date their direct reports, requiring at least a couple of levels of separation if they are in the same chain of command. By ensuring that the people dating aren't writing each other's reviews, you remove most of the potential for nepotism, but without it being quite so lonely at the top.
Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.
There are 200 lower cost engineers from India waiting to take your place.
> Again, this is not some new radical SJW interpretation. This is what has been taught in sexual harassment training since the 1990s.
Too bad nobody told Bill.
Of course, he got in more trouble for the perjury conviction than the BJ, since he was lying about the BJ to hide the fact that he pressured his interns for sex, including women like Paula Jones who weren't interested, then tried to ruin them in the press with his wife ("bimbo explosion" & co.)
straight-up killing people at crazy-bad levels
They have a lot of practice in that area.
Lock all the accounts of people that don't show up for work that day, and escort them out the next day.
Time to clean house.
The guy was fired over an unproven accusation. What more do they want?
When a boss and a subordinate have a consensual affair the other subordinates fear there will be favoritism.
Yes - now this is a real drawback to workplace affairs, even when (as for the vast majority) they're consensual.
That said, though: why is this a "women's walk"? If (mostly male) bosses are having affairs with female subordinates, and possibly engaging in favoritism, surely it's the male subordinates who are disadvantaged?
that will teach them
That's why I, as a boss, make sure to play around with all employees equally, irrespective of their age, gender or sexual preference!
I would argue that favoritism and fears about it is an in-built element of any organization. I have been in plenty of organizations where there was obvious and non-obvious favoritism driven by all the usual non-sexual power/influence dynamics, including fears that X was giving better assignments to Y and Z because of favoritism, etc.
Unless two employees having a consensual affair are open and transparent about their affair, I would argue there is less likelihood of favoritism as they are probably inclined to keep their affair secret and this leads to a kind of enforced hyper-neutrality to avoid giving it away.
I think the "harassment" part actually comes in when employees begin to assume that sexual favors are some kind of job requirement, and that not giving in sexual come-ons will result in termination, lack of advancement, etc. It's the coercive aspect of power combined with sexuality.
Where is this company town where every potential sexual partner works for the same company? That certain level of promotion person needs to get out of the office and find someone else to fuck.
Yes it's an anecdote! Were you expecting original research in a Slashdot comment?
The French revolution all over again ... last week's hero of progress is this week's guy to lose his head ...
(You may think my old fashioned morals are crusty, but at least they don't change every five minutes.)
> You are doing it wrong.
I respectfully disagree. I hire great people and have a very effective (and cost-effective) team. We have a very good mix of skills. We hire the skills we need. I have a standard set of interview questions that I ask all applicants so we can directly compare their answers. (Though if a candidate completely flubs the easiest questions there is no point in asking much more difficult questions on the same topic.)
I say a mix of skills because I learned it's silly to pay someone top dollar to fill out change requests. Instead, we have people at different levels in their career (who have different costs). The most skilled person, who has over 20 years of experience and some recognition in the industry, helps the less-experienced (cheaper) person to make sure they are doing the job well. We get a lot of good work done, more than other teams that have a similar budget.
Are you thinking about someone who *looks* like the boss, or someone who has the same *skills* as the boss? I'm not in the modelling industry, so I don't care what people look like. That's good, because I'm ugly - and highly skilled at what I do. I wouldn't want someone with the same *skills* as the boss because we only need one person running interference between our team and upper management. That's his most important skill set - corporate politics and schmoozing. We only need one of those.
Although I *used* to be in the porn industry, in my current industry we don't use our genitals in our work, so I don't hire based on genitals. I hire based on the skills we need. It works quite well.
Remember when women wanted to enter the workplace and be treated equally?
Yeah they didn't actually want that.
Either women start playing by the same rules as everyone else, or they don't go into the work force.
Innocent. Until. Proven. Guilty. Or GTFO
Massive confusion and strong hormonal drive to change at all cost very quickly. Each month new shit on the agenda, and in between even more change. No sane person can work in environment like that. Change is good but not ADHD.
Such contracts typically do not require a criminal conviction to fire someone for cause. And typically it's firing for cause that stops golden parachutes.
And with that much money on the table Google guarantees that they would answer for it in court. Then they would have to air any dirty laundry in public as well as run the possibility of losing and having to take him back with pay. This was the expedient position. 90 million dollars gets you a very good legal team.
If openness were to make favoritism less likely we still have have the fear of favoritism and all the negatives it brings and hence the "hostile workplace". Regarding other sources of favoritism, those may be prohibited as well and then there is the problem of one wrong not excusing a different wrong.
My memory is different: "hostile work environment" that didn't involve favoritism or threats didn't become commonplace until a bit after.
Either way, I would agree to some degree of punishment for such as long as it's enforced consistently between parties so that it's not used as a political weapon.
I recall the corporation I worked for when I learned that a consensual affair creates a hostile workplace, it was an unintuitive concept to me at the time. I left that company in the early 90s. Perhaps our HR department was cutting edge.
I guess you have to experience it to be a true believer. I worked for large companies with all these "why do they need that" policies. Working for a small company I saw nepotism, sexual relationship favoritism, sexual relationship retribution, and all kinds of other workplace drama. Plus political power plays by managers to gain more power by playing the employees like pawns in near-literal battles between executives. It was a very toxic environment.
Even those who arrange and design shrubberies are under considerable economic stress at this period in history.
No-where in any of that did you mention how you find people to interview. Do you do anything at all to increase the size of your talent pool?
The hiring process is about much more than just interviewing. If you don't find the good people to begin with you can't interview them.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
If Google has a 'no sex between employees' or 'no sex between direct reports' policy, then the dismissal was perfectly justifiable. What I have a problem with was calling the BJ 'coerced'. At some point, when you're having a sexual affair with someone, and you meet them in a hotel room, if you blow them without being physically forced to, the reasons for that specific BJ fall into a gray area - where coercion may or may not have something to do with it.
There are many possible explanations for why the woman in question didn't just say no and "it's over, Andy". One of which would involve potential harm to her career - which, face it, may come in the form of loss of any advantage her career gained by fucking the boss. None of this says that Rubin isn't a schmuck - and in violation of company policy. It does not, however, automatically make him a rapist. Maybe 'coercion' is not being used in this case to imply any kind of forced sex, but it sure sounds like it's meant that way.
Posted from my Android phone. Oh, I can change this? There, that's better...
I am trying to figure out what happened to the presumption of innocence,. Perhaps we should allow a Jury decide if they are guilty or not, before we start robing people of there livelihoods. And before the "believe Women" Shouting starts to reloly to this post, these women are being beleved the start of a criminal investigation and possibly trial is the product of that belief.
We have a number of avenues we use to find candidates and recruits. One avenue I've personally added specifically targets those who are actively developing their professional skills, people who do continual professional education.
Or "fun" by some people's standards. Some like to be involved in drama.
Table-ized A.I.
Geez, this is getting to be a regular thing now! With all these Google walkouts happening for all kinds of reasons, does anyone there actually still... you know... work?
So they call consensual relationships harassment. Thanks for making this clear.
Depends on the cause. Generally no.
Fiorina got hers, despite being fired for gross incompetence and running the company into the ground.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
Do you have that from a credible source?
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
CA's newest Senator got her start in politics as quid pro quo for fucking Willie Brown while on his payroll.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'