if it happened that there weren't very many people like that already in the company
That clause could apply to the people you describe as bigots and haters, or it could apply to your reason for hiring people with certain gender or racial characteristics.
Must be the former, unless in your jurisdiction sexism and racism are legal.
It's called discrimination, and we do not need any of it.
I'm not in the US, in my country there's also a terrible racial imbalance in technology employment. Despite that I do not support quotas to limit the number of Indians.
You see, it's pretty fucking easy to treat people as individuals, not stereotypes. Try it.
I realize that somebody changed my words and is making a false equivalence.
On what fucking planet is 'it makes sense to exclude [race] [gender]' not racist and sexist?
I'm terribly sorry, I thought I was in a conversation with someone with basic reading comprehension.
I understand that people will disagree with me on lots of topics. Hopefully they can do so (or not) while considering what I actually wrote in its entirety.
I did, but what you wrote in its entirety is predicated on accepting your repugnant suggestion that racism and sexism are acceptable. They're not.
there are numerous networks that already are performing that duty well. While they may not be explicitly stated as their goal to be "Helping straight white men from America find a welcoming place in the community." the outcome is that they are really well designed to do that
The draft Reporting Guide states that there's no appeals process against reprimands or temporary bans, and if you talk about the lies some cunt made up about you in public you're immediately contravening the CoC whether you had initially or not.
It's basically a charter for a small group to maliciously take over the project. No governance, no accountability, no transparency.
He's not entitled to fairness in the family courts. Shit, he's not entitled to justice from the justice system. He's not entitled to 80% of the scholarships and bursaries out there. Make that 98% if you exclude sports ones. He's not entitled to vote without putting his life at risk. He's not entitled to the same life expectancy as half the population., He's not entitled to equal education.
Hang on. Remind me, what the fuck _is_ he entitled to?
It is easier to look at something easier to measure, like strength: it is obvious that men are stronger, on the average, than women -- so no one insists that a wood-cutting company employs 50% female lumberjacks -- but also, because individual variance trumps averages
According to the IAAF anybody that's strong enough to be a lumberjack isn't female.
No, it's not. He does not want to condone an organisation that is discriminatory, and Outreachy is pretty fucking clearly discriminatory.
His claim is that Outreachy is discriminatory because it's mission is to increase visible minority and female participation in open source.
Where did he state that claim? It wasn't in the note he sent to the mail list. I think you just made that up.
since he was already a contributor to llvm, he literally could not be discriminated against by Outreachy
What the fuck does that have to do with it? You can't rape me pregnant but trust me, I catch you on top of a screaming lady there's going to be what the police would describe as an incident.
My initial reaction is that he's either lying about his reasons or is so self-unaware that he doesn't understand his own motivations
That's because you don't understand his reasons or motivations. The issue here is not him.
he just needed an excuse that he feels doesn't make him feel like he's leaving the project because it's too mature for him
That's an interesting suggestion but in no way invalidates the actual reason he explicitly gave for leaving the project.
the attack on the education system means that the nation as a whole is being dumbified on an unprecedented scale
I concur, the takeover by radicals intent on shouting down anybody that challenges their views with things like evidence is an attack that's seriously damaging the education system.
I'm not sure what the relevance of Trump is to this though?
Way to totally miss his point. Straight over your head. I guess you were safely cocooned in a few tons of metal and plastic at the time - or hadn't you fucking noticed that mass transit systems tend to weigh a lot?
You're stupid if you think you're in danger from the US police.
As for policies towards foreigners, in what way are the US less accepting of foreigners than (e.g.) Switzerland? You know, the country that explicitly voted to prevent mass immigration?
investing in equities - especially in a company like Tesla - was totally idiotic
The only idiocy is that statement.
All investment is a compromise between risk and return. Equities are a very valid and frequently sensible investment choice. High growth equities come with higher risk but are nonetheless a very valid and frequently sensible investment choice.
I'm not sure how this is relevant to his business acumen.
and you're being his bitch unnecessarily easily.
Or this. But I'm also going to have to demonstrate my ignorance on homosexual matters here. If he's a cocksucker, why would he want a bitch? They don't have cocks.
Yeah, a film in which four different cast members won acting awards, the writing won an award, the direction won an award, and the writing won a fucking Hugo back when it had credibility must have had really shit plot lines, scripts and acting.
Slashdot Mirror
if it happened that there weren't very many people like that already in the company
That clause could apply to the people you describe as bigots and haters, or it could apply to your reason for hiring people with certain gender or racial characteristics.
Must be the former, unless in your jurisdiction sexism and racism are legal.
It's called discrimination, and we do not need any of it.
I'm not in the US, in my country there's also a terrible racial imbalance in technology employment. Despite that I do not support quotas to limit the number of Indians.
You see, it's pretty fucking easy to treat people as individuals, not stereotypes. Try it.
I realize that somebody changed my words and is making a false equivalence.
On what fucking planet is 'it makes sense to exclude [race] [gender]' not racist and sexist?
I'm terribly sorry, I thought I was in a conversation with someone with basic reading comprehension.
I understand that people will disagree with me on lots of topics. Hopefully they can do so (or not) while considering what I actually wrote in its entirety.
I did, but what you wrote in its entirety is predicated on accepting your repugnant suggestion that racism and sexism are acceptable. They're not.
there are numerous networks that already are performing that duty well. While they may not be explicitly stated as their goal to be "Helping straight white men from America find a welcoming place in the community." the outcome is that they are really well designed to do that
Really? Which ones?
Let me paraphrase here.
"a program that seeks to achieve its aims through sexism and racism doesn't seem at all out of place for the purpose of the organisation"
I don't know enough about it to agree or disagree, but it seems unlikely the purpose of the organisation is also racist and sexist.
You just inferred he's a dick, which is an insult and also aggressive language.
Luckily for you Slashdot doesn't enforce the LLVM code of conduct.
I guess you're right. People that claim they're doing 'reverse' discrimination are morally bankrupt as well as ignorant.
Google is your friend.
https://shop.spreadshirt.com/p...
I await the eventual pillaging of my property and Family's assets.
Ah, congratulations on getting married.
That's not the only issue with it.
The draft Reporting Guide states that there's no appeals process against reprimands or temporary bans, and if you talk about the lies some cunt made up about you in public you're immediately contravening the CoC whether you had initially or not.
It's basically a charter for a small group to maliciously take over the project. No governance, no accountability, no transparency.
It is for the rest of us.
Yeah, I know, I just broke 18 CoC. Me, I say that's the fucking problem with them.
You do realise that you just wrote
It would seem to make sense to [be racist and sexist]
Hopefully you can understand why some people might disagree.
He's not entitled to fairness in the family courts.
Shit, he's not entitled to justice from the justice system.
He's not entitled to 80% of the scholarships and bursaries out there. Make that 98% if you exclude sports ones.
He's not entitled to vote without putting his life at risk.
He's not entitled to the same life expectancy as half the population.,
He's not entitled to equal education.
Hang on. Remind me, what the fuck _is_ he entitled to?
It is easier to look at something easier to measure, like strength: it is obvious that men are stronger, on the average, than women -- so no one insists that a wood-cutting company employs 50% female lumberjacks -- but also, because individual variance trumps averages
According to the IAAF anybody that's strong enough to be a lumberjack isn't female.
Individual variance now disqualifies you from the group: https://www.iaaf.org/news/pres...
The problem is that the sentence reads exactly the same whether you use the word 'reverse' in it or not.
Except that statement is materially false.
No, it's not. He does not want to condone an organisation that is discriminatory, and Outreachy is pretty fucking clearly discriminatory.
His claim is that Outreachy is discriminatory because it's mission is to increase visible minority and female participation in open source.
Where did he state that claim? It wasn't in the note he sent to the mail list. I think you just made that up.
since he was already a contributor to llvm, he literally could not be discriminated against by Outreachy
What the fuck does that have to do with it? You can't rape me pregnant but trust me, I catch you on top of a screaming lady there's going to be what the police would describe as an incident.
My initial reaction is that he's either lying about his reasons or is so self-unaware that he doesn't understand his own motivations
That's because you don't understand his reasons or motivations. The issue here is not him.
he just needed an excuse that he feels doesn't make him feel like he's leaving the project because it's too mature for him
That's an interesting suggestion but in no way invalidates the actual reason he explicitly gave for leaving the project.
You can only be racist or sexist if you actually say or do racist or sexist things.
What the fuck does being racist or sexist have to do with it.
It's all down to what you can be accused and lynched of. If you want a recent example, investigate the situation James Damore found himself in.
the attack on the education system means that the nation as a whole is being dumbified on an unprecedented scale
I concur, the takeover by radicals intent on shouting down anybody that challenges their views with things like evidence is an attack that's seriously damaging the education system.
I'm not sure what the relevance of Trump is to this though?
Way to totally miss his point. Straight over your head. I guess you were safely cocooned in a few tons of metal and plastic at the time - or hadn't you fucking noticed that mass transit systems tend to weigh a lot?
You're stupid if you think you're in danger from the US police.
As for policies towards foreigners, in what way are the US less accepting of foreigners than (e.g.) Switzerland? You know, the country that explicitly voted to prevent mass immigration?
But we've already confirmed you're stupid.
It's weird that those artificial criticisms of Canada have made me like the place more.
investing in equities - especially in a company like Tesla - was totally idiotic
The only idiocy is that statement.
All investment is a compromise between risk and return. Equities are a very valid and frequently sensible investment choice. High growth equities come with higher risk but are nonetheless a very valid and frequently sensible investment choice.
Peter Thiel is a cocksucker
I'm not sure how this is relevant to his business acumen.
and you're being his bitch unnecessarily easily.
Or this. But I'm also going to have to demonstrate my ignorance on homosexual matters here. If he's a cocksucker, why would he want a bitch? They don't have cocks.
Yeah, a film in which four different cast members won acting awards, the writing won an award, the direction won an award, and the writing won a fucking Hugo back when it had credibility must have had really shit plot lines, scripts and acting.
What the fuck is a trump davidian (and is it a compliment?) and what the fuck is contradictory about the two sentences you quoted?
Sorry, I should be more gentle, English may not be your native language.