Page 27 of 55 FirstFirst ...
17
25
26
27
28
29
37
... LastLast
  1. #521
    Quote Originally Posted by TrollHunter3000 View Post
    Your assertion is blatantly false and any business that partakes in this practice would violating a few laws. For once, "targets" and "quotas" are absolutely illegal unless the EEOC approves an affirmative action hiring plan which is not done lightly.

    I advise if you know of such practices happening, report it to the EEOC. I've worked for and with dozens of companies and government entities with hundreds of thousands of employees and the method I described is common practice.
    With your expertise, can you reflect on what Nike is doing then?
    https://www.cnbc.com/2021/03/11/nike...k-to-them.html

    By 2025, Nike said, it aims to achieve 50% representation of women in its global corporate workforce (which doesn’t include retail store and warehouse workers), and 45% representation of women in leadership positions (VP level and above). It’s targeting 35% representation of racial and ethnic minorities in its U.S. workforce by then, too.

  2. #522
    Quote Originally Posted by Alamhaoingaturlife View Post
    There is no such thing as properly executed diversity hire.
    Either you're hiring the person most qualified for the job, or you're hiring someone worse, but who ticks the quota checkmark.
    No. You hire the person who ticks the quota checkmark and additionally is more qualified than the other person who doesn't.

    Your very statement proves the discriminatory mindset that makes these measures necessary in the first place. You insinuate that a POC, a women, a person with disabilities etc. is by default less qualified.


  3. #523
    TBH I didn't read this one. So actually after reading it this one is by far the best of all those that were stated before. What did it come to that Bobby Kotick makes better response than all those old Blizzard Devs.

  4. #524
    Quote Originally Posted by Xez View Post
    But the political left hates Fox and Trump and wants them destroyed. They don't have the perspective of "the other side ought to exist because their grievances are, to an extent, legitimate, even though my side's are more correct." I, as a conservative, believe that the political left has some good points and ought to exist, and if it did not exist, the political right would get way out of control. But I've never sensed or heard the same from the left.
    I believe Trump is a cancer on society. There is no two ways about it. I believe FOX needs to get their head out of their ass and stop fishing for ratings. When FOX does actual journalism, they're really fucking good at it. When they try to pander to the hard right for ratings, they suck balls.

    I believe the political spectrum is inherently flawed. It segregates people based on a checkmark system, and is highly frustrating. Because there are enough conservative principles I'm quite comfortable with, as are many others. But holy shit if some of them aren't whacko and destructive.

    You're also not allowed to say 'I've never sensed or heard that from the left'. I just did it.

  5. #525
    Quote Originally Posted by Yarathir View Post
    It is possible.

    But, and I know this is a cliché, can you tell me why there's fewer garbagewomen than men? Oppression? Societal discrimination? Or might it just be that a lot of women don't really like the notion of that job? Gaming isn't for everyone, film making isn't for everyone, teaching isn't for everyone, sports aren't for everyone, and we have no problem conceptualizing or even acknowledging that except for the industries that seem glamorous. Which, to be honest, I think gamedev isn't all that glamorous in practice. Only on the surface, from a consumer standpoint.
    I'm a game Dev but I'd never work for a big company, Make your own game and don't worry about big fucking shit companies.
    Lead Game Designer

    YouTube Channel

    https://www.youtube.com/@Nateanderthal

  6. #526
    Quote Originally Posted by Nimin View Post
    It's been studied and proved that males on average tend do be more interested in the "mechanical" aspect of things and women more in the "people" side of stuff.
    It's the reason why there's a ton of male mechanics and tons of female nurses, for example.

    It's no surprise that most if not all the best vidya that have ever been produced came from all-male neckbeard teams, they're deep into their craft while an all-female team might just touch surface level, like we saw happen in e-sports tournaments.
    This truth might be unpleasant to some but it's true nonetheless.
    The problem, if those studies are even true, is people that extend those "common" characteristics to all women and all men. This mentality is actually what makes women advancing in STEM careers so difficult. They tend to get pushed into management and aren't able to utilize their technical skills as often because of the perception that women are more into the "people" side of things.

  7. #527
    Quote Originally Posted by Agrias2x View Post
    TBH I didn't read this one. So actually after reading it this one is by far the best of all those that were stated before. What did it come to that Bobby Kotick makes better response than all those old Blizzard Devs.
    Because he didn't write it. Most likely that law firm did.

  8. #528
    Quote Originally Posted by Magnagarde View Post
    Doesn't mean the applicants could be better if other groups of people were included either.
    This is literally how statistics work. You're just factually wrong.

  9. #529
    Quote Originally Posted by Unholyground View Post
    I'm a game Dev but I'd never work for a big company, Make your own game and don't worry about big fucking shit companies.
    I agree wholeheartedly. When I was younger, I loved the idea of working at a big gaming company.

    Now? Screw that. Indie studios or just making your own company because at AAA studios, you're just not really a person. Maybe to your colleagues, but not to the people above you.

  10. #530
    Quote Originally Posted by Eggroll View Post
    No. You hire the person who ticks the quota checkmark and additionally is more qualified than the other person who doesn't.

    Your very statement proves the discriminatory mindset that makes these measures necessary in the first place. You insinuate that a POC, a women, a person with disabilities etc. is by default less qualified.
    Your reading comprehension needs some work.


    "Either you're hiring the person most qualified for the job (this may include those who happen to be a minority), or you're hiring someone worse, but who ticks the quota checkmark."

  11. #531
    Quote Originally Posted by Nimin View Post
    Lmao "I advise you indoctrinate yourself more on buzzword buzzword buzzword neomarxism buzzword".

    Yeah haha no, thanks.
    What here is a buzzword? Do you know what buzzwords are?

    Imagine thinking being educated is the same as being indoctrinated.

  12. #532
    Quote Originally Posted by Valkyrst View Post
    You didn't read what I said OR you just cherrypicked. I didn't say a properly executed diversity hire. I'm discussing properly executed equal opportunity hiring. That doesn't mean hiring the diversity option. It means exploring all options without prejudice or subconscious bias or preference.
    People who want to argue against basic equality always act as if suitability for a job is an objective measurement like length of a stick as opposed to a collection of various things. One of the biggest examples of that is how people argue that what some folks would dismiss as "diversity hires" are rejected because they "dont fit in to company culture" but what Blizz, and Riot, and Ubisoft and so many others has laid bare is that their "company culture" is absolute rot. Which lays it very bare two things. One that even if they advertise equal opportunity hiring they're not actually doing it (so all the folks saying theyre mad at diversity hiring in gaming are basically lying) and that two they're hiring people who will either not speak out against a culture of sexual harassment, or be targets of that harassment, or be perpetrators.

    One thing people don't quite reckon with is that the "golden days" of gaming they hearken back to would be characterized by rockstars of talent who weren't part of the frat boy culture being systematically denied hiring, advancement, equal pay, and in some cases just straight up being pushed out of the medium.

  13. #533
    Man 21 century is really screwed up... damn snowflakes man. Everyone is offended and every b*tch think is sexually harassed because some guy is looking at her. Pathetic.

  14. #534
    Quote Originally Posted by FelPlague View Post
    You really think education is indoctrination? Holy fuck the flat earth ideals have rotted our collective intelligence to new levels.
    I think propaganda masqueraded as education is indoctrination, yes. That's pretty much the definition.

  15. #535
    Quote Originally Posted by TrollHunter3000 View Post
    This is literally how statistics work. You're just factually wrong.
    I'm don't want to talk about statistics with you because you'd probably end up calling me a racist or whatever whenever faced with facts.
    Last edited by Magnagarde; 2021-07-28 at 03:45 PM.

  16. #536
    So what I'm getting from this thread is,

    hiring white person = bad
    hiring non-white person = good
    picking white person over non-white person = bad no matter what
    between two equally-skilled candidates, hiring based on skin color is good if you pick the non-white, but bad if you pick the white

    Funny that the people who claim to be anti-racist are, in reality, just racist against whites. Something something "horseshoe theory".
    Last edited by anon5123; 2021-07-28 at 03:47 PM.

  17. #537
    Quote Originally Posted by Magnagarde View Post
    What I think is the goal is to run a succesful business that doesn't fail in its obligations to the customers and employees. Everyone group of people can fail at this.



    What was "explained" to me is that equality of outcome is good, that in a good world every group of people would apply equally for a job and an equal amount of each would be hired. I know that to be factually wrong and mathematically unachievable without sacrificing efficiency and good business practice.

    I would expect us to start from the bottom then, with female miners, farmers, garbagewomen, female carpenters and more. Get that representation going in the sectors that number the most employees in order to hammer that equality in properly and globally, you know?



    I actually think they're not okay because, as things stand right now in the gaming industry, someone would be hired over another person just because they have a different reproductive organ or were born with a different skin color.



    They made antological games and yes, they were almost exclusively all white and male. A part of the employees and some of them are included in a recent lawsuit, which doesn't negate Blizzard's successes of the past and the fact that the majority of them never raped or sexually harassed anyone.

    The only thing that I'm getting getting from the last sentence is that you seriously believe that sexual harassment, in a workplace counting thousands, would've been impossible or that there would've surely been less of it if there were less white people at Blizzard and more of everyone else. It is an extremely silly thing to imply.
    Not one person is saying Blizzard hasn't made successful games. But the games aren't in question here. The behaviour of a number of people is.

    A number of people. Not all. That's the key point. A further issue is the wilful ignorance of the leadership in response to this behaviour.

  18. #538
    Quote Originally Posted by Yarathir View Post
    The same reason why, for example, there might be more female and more white nurses and teachers. There are such things as natural interests that you can't really program out of people. That's not to say that white men are the only gamers and game creators, but it's a reason for why they make up the majority of the industry. Passing the buck for making [insert industry] more diverse is a bit cheap.

    Things will change with time, of course, but assuming there is a dominant group only because of evil oppression is pretty weak. Don't discount personal choice.

    Though I will admit that I personally went from wanting to work at Blizzard years ago to not even wanting to send my biggest enemy to work there, so I can't imagine how other people feel after all of this. But that's a corrupt and apathetic work environment thing, people with authority who feel they can get away with anything just plainly reveling in abusing others. I don't think you should necessarily extrapolate that that makes the entire industry unapproachable for anyone non-white and non-male.

    Frankly, regardless of skin color or sex or sexuality, I feel like most people in their right mind would want to avoid AAA gaming studios, potential harassment and abuse aside, thanks to how pervasive crunch culture is, or how you are basically seen as a throwaway tool for games that are developed in phases.
    I don't understand why this is such a difficult concept to grasp.

    We measure whether or not there are equitable outcomes using something called MATH. There is literally an entire field dedicated to this sort of thing. We can estimate expected outcomes based on the available job market and what the demographics of that market look like.

  19. #539
    Quote Originally Posted by Ivarr View Post
    Your reading comprehension needs some work.


    "Either you're hiring the person most qualified for the job (this may include those who happen to be a minority), or you're hiring someone worse, but who ticks the quota checkmark."

    The assumption people have that the state of gaming right now - mostly white dudes - is a result of hiring for most qualified and that is fundamentally incorrect.

  20. #540
    Quote Originally Posted by anon5123 View Post
    So what I'm getting from this thread is,

    hiring white person = bad
    hiring non-white person = good
    picking white person over non-white person = bad no matter what

    Funny that the people who claim to be anti-racist are, in reality, just racist against whites. Something something "horseshoe theory".
    You then clearly don't know how to read and/or interpret information.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •