On August 3, 2017 George Sadlier (“Sadlier”), a Director at Google, sent out a mass email condemning James’ essay as “repulsive and intellectually dishonest” and promising an HR investigation into Damore. Sadlier also promoted posts that advocated for physical violence against Damore. Subsequently, On Friday, August 4, 2017, Damore received a late-night email from Alex Hidalgo, a Site Reliability Engineer at Google in Sadlier’s organization, which stated, “You’re a misogynist and a terrible person. I will keep hounding you until one of us is fired. Fuck you.”
Damore forwarded Hidalgo’s email to Google HR, and was told to work from home for some time until emotions cooled down. Similar threats followed from other coworkers. Google executives and employees condemned Damore, his memo, and his views. Some coworkers demanded Damore’s termination, and the termination of other individuals who shared his views
Not only did Google terminate Damore for his political views relating to workplace issues, but they then rewarded individuals who disagreed with and disparaged Damore. 75.
The Google Recognition Team allowed employees to give fellow employees “Peer Bonuses” for arguing against Damore’s political viewpoints. Peer Bonuses were typically reserved for outstanding work performance or for going above and beyond an employee’s job duties. Defending the liberal agenda, or defending violations of California employment law, is not in any Google employee’s job description
In one example of this, an employee gave a Peer Bonus to another employee, and stated that the bonus was for “speaking up for googley values and promoting [diversity and inclusion] in the wretched hive of scum and villainy that is [Damore’s Memo].” The Google Recognition Team reviewed this justification, considered it appropriate, and allowed the bonus to proceed
https://twitter.com/RMac18/status/950465440987295744
Other highlights are the apparently large amount of furries at google
Anyway, he was fired for "creating a hostile workplace." So he can prove that with e-mails, but that just proves Google's point for firing him.
This is not great for google. It makes them look like a joke. I'm surprised they didn't settle so to just keep this crap out of public eyes.
Yes, but now everyone knows that Google is infected with Furries.This is not great for google. It makes them look like a joke. I'm surprised they didn't settle so to just keep this crap out of public eyes.
Prolly figure everyone hates this dude anyway
Anyway, he was fired for "creating a hostile workplace." So he can prove that with e-mails, but that just proves Google's point for firing him.
But surely on that basis, he could also prove that others were contributing towards the creation of the hostile workplace and therefore, by only taking action against him, these actions were discriminatory on Google's part?
shyamalan twist
Yes, but now everyone knows that Google is infected with Furries.This is not great for google. It makes them look like a joke. I'm surprised they didn't settle so to just keep this crap out of public eyes.
Prolly figure everyone hates this dude anyway
I don't mean to go after them for slander. Point was that it was framed that way when sent to the press by someone in the company as retaliation for bringing up discriminatory practices and ineffective diversity tactics. At least, that would be the claim rather than slander.Oh totally. ergo, why I'm surprised google just doesn't settle and get this done with. Too much egg on face.
The backlash, according to the lawsuit, came after the press articles attacking James. If it was a problem then HR and Diversity had plenty of opportunity to state so before it went to press. HR knew about the discrimination complaints and knew of Damore's memo. Only took action after the framing in the press., as if that spin job gave them something they could fire him over.
Wow, liberals painting all Nazis with a broad brush? I though they were supposed to be the tolerant ones? ::)
According to the document, the memo was seen and edited by several people over the course of this. It was an opendoc with editing notes from people who wished to comment and contribute. It was first just among the colleagues at the Diversity Summit, then he sent it to HR and Diversity, then he put it in another workgroup that talks about Diversity, and then he sent a final edit to the Skeptic community group within Google. It's at this point that someone leaked it to the press and it was edited/framed as saying women are inferior. The press always said that's how they received the memo, in its edited manner without citation.
According to the document, the memo was seen and edited by several people over the course of this. It was an opendoc with editing notes from people who wished to comment and contribute. It was first just among the colleagues at the Diversity Summit, then he sent it to HR and Diversity, then he put it in another workgroup that talks about Diversity, and then he sent a final edit to the Skeptic community group within Google. It's at this point that someone leaked it to the press and it was edited/framed as saying women are inferior. The press always said that's how they received the memo, in its edited manner without citation.
I keep hearing his defenders say this, but that's essentially what he was arguing. Why else would he cite studies* about how male and female brains work?spoiler (click to show/hide)*Hilariously enough, one of the authors of the studies he cited completely disagreed with Damore's conclusion, but Damore doubled down and insisted that the author was on his side but was being "silenced" by the Left/Media/Jews :lol[close]
According to the document, the memo was seen and edited by several people over the course of this. It was an opendoc with editing notes from people who wished to comment and contribute. It was first just among the colleagues at the Diversity Summit, then he sent it to HR and Diversity, then he put it in another workgroup that talks about Diversity, and then he sent a final edit to the Skeptic community group within Google. It's at this point that someone leaked it to the press and it was edited/framed as saying women are inferior. The press always said that's how they received the memo, in its edited manner without citation.
I keep hearing his defenders say this, but that's essentially what he was arguing. Why else would he cite studies* about how male and female brains work?spoiler (click to show/hide)*Hilariously enough, one of the authors of the studies he cited completely disagreed with Damore's conclusion, but Damore doubled down and insisted that the author was on his side but was being "silenced" by the Left/Media/Jews :lol[close]
Because biological factors create propensities towards a trait on average within a population and not deterministic absolutes for the individual. There is no discussion or citation in the memo that speaks to superiority at a skill, but rather predisposition towards interest in that field which may be a factor in the general distribution of degrees and employment within that field.
According to the document, the memo was seen and edited by several people over the course of this. It was an opendoc with editing notes from people who wished to comment and contribute. It was first just among the colleagues at the Diversity Summit, then he sent it to HR and Diversity, then he put it in another workgroup that talks about Diversity, and then he sent a final edit to the Skeptic community group within Google. It's at this point that someone leaked it to the press and it was edited/framed as saying women are inferior. The press always said that's how they received the memo, in its edited manner without citation.
I keep hearing his defenders say this, but that's essentially what he was arguing. Why else would he cite studies* about how male and female brains work?spoiler (click to show/hide)*Hilariously enough, one of the authors of the studies he cited completely disagreed with Damore's conclusion, but Damore doubled down and insisted that the author was on his side but was being "silenced" by the Left/Media/Jews :lol[close]
Because biological factors create propensities towards a trait on average within a population and not deterministic absolutes for the individual. There is no discussion or citation in the memo that speaks to superiority at a skill, but rather predisposition towards interest in that field which may be a factor in the general distribution of degrees and employment within that field.
So he's not arguing that women are biologically "inferior" when it comes to software programming, but are just biologically predisposed to preferring other types of work?
According to the document, the memo was seen and edited by several people over the course of this. It was an opendoc with editing notes from people who wished to comment and contribute. It was first just among the colleagues at the Diversity Summit, then he sent it to HR and Diversity, then he put it in another workgroup that talks about Diversity, and then he sent a final edit to the Skeptic community group within Google. It's at this point that someone leaked it to the press and it was edited/framed as saying women are inferior. The press always said that's how they received the memo, in its edited manner without citation.
I keep hearing his defenders say this, but that's essentially what he was arguing. Why else would he cite studies* about how male and female brains work?spoiler (click to show/hide)*Hilariously enough, one of the authors of the studies he cited completely disagreed with Damore's conclusion, but Damore doubled down and insisted that the author was on his side but was being "silenced" by the Left/Media/Jews :lol[close]
Because biological factors create propensities towards a trait on average within a population and not deterministic absolutes for the individual. There is no discussion or citation in the memo that speaks to superiority at a skill, but rather predisposition towards interest in that field which may be a factor in the general distribution of degrees and employment within that field.
So he's not arguing that women are biologically "inferior" when it comes to software programming, but are just biologically predisposed to preferring other types of work?
That on average women and men have predispositions that could have biological causes, and that those traits would factor into the demographics of something like comp sci degrees and programming work.
According to the document, the memo was seen and edited by several people over the course of this. It was an opendoc with editing notes from people who wished to comment and contribute. It was first just among the colleagues at the Diversity Summit, then he sent it to HR and Diversity, then he put it in another workgroup that talks about Diversity, and then he sent a final edit to the Skeptic community group within Google. It's at this point that someone leaked it to the press and it was edited/framed as saying women are inferior. The press always said that's how they received the memo, in its edited manner without citation.
I keep hearing his defenders say this, but that's essentially what he was arguing. Why else would he cite studies* about how male and female brains work?spoiler (click to show/hide)*Hilariously enough, one of the authors of the studies he cited completely disagreed with Damore's conclusion, but Damore doubled down and insisted that the author was on his side but was being "silenced" by the Left/Media/Jews :lol[close]
Because biological factors create propensities towards a trait on average within a population and not deterministic absolutes for the individual. There is no discussion or citation in the memo that speaks to superiority at a skill, but rather predisposition towards interest in that field which may be a factor in the general distribution of degrees and employment within that field.
So he's not arguing that women are biologically "inferior" when it comes to software programming, but are just biologically predisposed to preferring other types of work?
That on average women and men have predispositions that could have biological causes, and that those traits would factor into the demographics of something like comp sci degrees and programming work.
So the current composition of women in CS fields is due to mainly or mostly to biology and not social factors?
"Muh bootstraps and individualism!"*cracks knuckles*
*sees a study talking about broad, distributed biological traits across entire populations*
"Women are dumb cause science!!"
When Fong-Jones was reported to Google HR, Google’s initial reaction was to state that since Fong-Jones was responding “to some pretty insensitive comments from other colleagues and reacting to an environment that we know have been less than friendly to women and minorities at times,” that her behavior was taken out of context and excused her comments. Google HR then stated that “some empathy could be valuable as you reflect on the conversations.”
Google Was Unable to Respond to Logical Arguments
Taking that as a request, I'll add you to the comprehensive list of cuckdom.
Taking that as a request, I'll add you to the comprehensive list of cuckdom.
So how many are cucks for you now?
Bing IS much better for searching porn. Damore's right...'Steve Ballmer', look into that
:neo
Taking that as a request, I'll add you to the comprehensive list of cuckdom.Quaking in his boots, I'm sure.
https://twitter.com/jordanbpeterson/status/950736306694336512OK, done. ...What am I supposed to see?
It is bad that google has unlimited power over our lives but these nerds make it so hard to take them seriously
A bunch of fatties in the google results?spoiler (click to show/hide):rollsafe[close]
A bunch of fatties in the google results?Like 3. All from the same site. I guess that shoud be impossible by whatever metric this guy has set.spoiler (click to show/hide):rollsafe[close]
A bunch of fatties in the google results?Like 3. All from the same site. I guess that shoud be impossible by whatever metric this guy has set.spoiler (click to show/hide):rollsafe[close]
No Asians though. Does that mean something, too? :thinking
According to court documents filed today, a former Google engineer is suing the company for discrimination, harassment, retaliation, and wrongful termination. "Tim Chevalier, a software developer and former site-reliability engineer at Google, claims that Google fired him when he responded with internal posts and memes to racist and sexist encounters within the company and the general response to the now-infamous James Damore memo," reports The Verge. From the report:
Chevalier said in a statement to The Verge, "It is a cruel irony that Google attempted to justify firing me by claiming that my social networking posts showed bias against my harassers." Chevalier, who is also disabled and transgender, alleges that his internal posts that defended women of color and marginalized people led directly to his termination in November 2017. He had worked at Google for a little under two years. Notably, Chevalier's posts had been quoted in Damore's lawsuit against Google -- in which Damore sued the company for discrimination against conservative white men -- as evidence Google permitted liberals to speak out at the company unpunished. Chevalier's lawsuit alleges that his firing is, in fact, a form of punishment. The lawsuit was filed in San Francisco County Superior Court and Chevalier is seeking damages for lost wages, emotional distress, punitive damages, and injunctive relief against those alleged harmful acts. Google did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
YouTube last year stopped hiring white and Asian males for technical positions because they didn’t help the world’s largest video site achieve its goals for improving diversity, according to a civil lawsuit filed by a former employee.
The lawsuit, filed by Arne Wilberg, a white male who worked at Google for nine years, including four years as a recruiter at YouTube, alleges the division of Alphabet Inc.’s GOOGL -2.94%▲ Google set quotas for hiring minorities. Last spring, YouTube recruiters were allegedly instructed to cancel interviews with applicants who weren’t female, black or Hispanic, and to “purge entirely” the applications of people who didn’t fit those categories, the lawsuit claims.
when he responded with internal posts and memes
https://twitter.com/jordanbpeterson/status/950736306694336512OK, done. ...What am I supposed to see?
It is bad that google has unlimited power over our lives but these nerds make it so hard to take them seriously
CROWD CONTROL SITUATIONhttps://twitter.com/jordanbpeterson/status/950736306694336512OK, done. ...What am I supposed to see?
It is bad that google has unlimited power over our lives but these nerds make it so hard to take them seriously
GUN CONTROL LAWS
https://twitter.com/jordanbpeterson/status/950736306694336512OK, done. ...What am I supposed to see?
It is bad that google has unlimited power over our lives but these nerds make it so hard to take them seriously
Jordan Peterson and Sam Harris are speaking at the Orpheum in a couple weeks. If Colin Moriarty and Googledweeb show up it'll be etoilets Eiffel tower dp fantasy come to lifePeterson and Harris will argue the entire time. They dont exactly see eye to eye.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/youtube-hiring-for-some-positions-excluded-white-and-asian-males-lawsuit-says-1519948013QuoteYouTube last year stopped hiring white and Asian males for technical positions because they didn’t help the world’s largest video site achieve its goals for improving diversity, according to a civil lawsuit filed by a former employee.
The lawsuit, filed by Arne Wilberg, a white male who worked at Google for nine years, including four years as a recruiter at YouTube, alleges the division of Alphabet Inc.’s GOOGL -2.94%▲ Google set quotas for hiring minorities. Last spring, YouTube recruiters were allegedly instructed to cancel interviews with applicants who weren’t female, black or Hispanic, and to “purge entirely” the applications of people who didn’t fit those categories, the lawsuit claims.
In your case, they probably know you have an inexplicable interest in fish penis and thought they cant chance it.