Page 26 of 55 FirstFirst ...
16
24
25
26
27
28
36
... LastLast
  1. #501
    Quote Originally Posted by The Stormbringer View Post
    Ah yes, of course. So, we just ignore that current injustices that are happening day-to-day and "move on"? We allow racism and discrimination to remain untouched as we "move forward"? Yes, how foolish of me. Clearly this will fix all our problems and get rid of that hate you were talking about.

    And Nimin, do you really think it works that way? That you can just go, "Aww gee shucks, even though the system is designed to step on me and keep me down, all I have to do is just stop crying and everything will be alright!" Holy fuck, talk about naive. This isn't about individual circumstances, though those definitely have an effect that shouldn't be ignored, it's about how the law, and the economy, and rules, and perceptions are set against minorities, or set in favor of the majority, rather than being equal.

    Also, "centuries ago"? You do know that Jim Crow and the Civil Rights era were less than a hundred years ago, right? You do understand that the position your grandparents are in affects your parents, and that affects you, RIGHT?

    I'll give you an example. My grandparents are farmers, and have been their whole lives. If they had been black, chances are they would've struggled to purchase the land that they worked for decades, because the system has HISTORICALLY been heavily biased or outright hostile against black people. My entire family might not have been born, or would've been born in completely different circumstances, thus leading to ME not being born. If you can't understand how this shit can affect people on a generational scale, then I don't know what to tell you.
    You conveniently ignored the "walk together hand in hand" bit. What do you imagine it means?

  2. #502

  3. #503
    Quote Originally Posted by Sluvs View Post
    Not sure, if you are trolling or not, but one of the complaint listed in the lawsuit is that women were not promoted(even when better qualified than the other candidates) and lacked any real presence in leadership. So, theoretically, putting more women in position could have prevented a lot of sexual harassment since they could have a support system.
    Yeah, not sure if you worked anywhere in your life, but people are entitled assholes in every workplace, and most promotions have nothing to do with merit,but how much they sucked up to their bosses. Most of these "better qualified female workers" are :
    a) nowhere near qualified enough just have a huge ego and think they are better than their coworkers.
    b) can't accept the fact that the person that was promoted wasn't promoted cause he is a male but because he is all up in the boss's asshole.

    But just like riot, and Ubisoft, people are jumping on the metoo wagon to score some easy money.

  4. #504
    Quote Originally Posted by zorkuus View Post
    Maybe they are the group who are the most interested in the subject matter (whatever it is)?
    Just like some other group might be better at something they are more interested in.
    Then that would be reflected when looking at the available job market. So, if it doesn't match that available job market, that would indicate an outreach issue.

  5. #505
    Old God Al Gorefiend's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    A state of madness
    Posts
    10,408
    Quote Originally Posted by Xez View Post
    And maybe this is the case. But is this sort of thinking, measuring suffering by millimeters and targeting our social empathy with laser precision, really how we make things better instead of just accepting that people suffer and trying to make things better for people in general with universalist language and action?
    I do think eventually, in a perfect world, we will speak to one another with equal passion and community.

    I think right now we need to take the action to reach that point and the fact whites are the primary "victims" of minorities reaching power positions just shows which people held it for so long that they fear a world without it

  6. #506
    Quote Originally Posted by TrollHunter3000 View Post
    Yeah, you're obviously ignorant as fuck in this field to the point you don't even understand the basics. If only white guys are applying for a job, it's absolutely insane to me that you think there isn't an issue with how that job is being marketed or what the reputation of that company is. And you not understanding that top talent is being missed out on if only white guys are applying means you believe only white guys exist among the top talent. Pretty fucking racist and sexist.
    If 10 whites guys applied for the job and I needed to hire 5 employees, I'd hire the best 5 white guys because those are the people that applied. It is a very simple logic to follow. I'd do the same if 10 black guys applied and I had to hire 5 employees once again; I'd pick the ones most suitable for the job they're being hired for and it would be only black guys. I wouldn't break my head over how many of this or that group applied because that's an inane thing to do.

    What you don't understand is that diversity hiring and good business practice don't necessarily go hand in hand. That's why you're immediately spewing buzzword classifications.
    Last edited by Magnagarde; 2021-07-28 at 03:16 PM.

  7. #507
    Quote Originally Posted by Magnagarde View Post
    If you actually look back on things, you'll see that most of these iconic franchises and their best installments were created by an all-male and all-white team of dudes who were, without any negative connotation, nerds for tabletop RPG games and games in general.
    Doesn't mean they couldn't have been better if other groups of people were included.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Ivarr View Post
    snip
    Do you have a point? Not sure how this is relevant to what you quoted.

  8. #508
    Quote Originally Posted by Straga21 View Post
    Yeah, not sure if you worked anywhere in your life, but people are entitled assholes in every workplace, and most promotions have nothing to do with merit,but how much they sucked up to their bosses. Most of these "better qualified female workers" are :
    a) nowhere near qualified enough just have a huge ego and think they are better than their coworkers.
    b) can't accept the fact that the person that was promoted wasn't promoted cause he is a male but because he is all up in the boss's asshole.

    But just like riot, and Ubisoft, people are jumping on the metoo wagon to score some easy money.
    Imagine if even 2 or 3 people within leadership at Blizzard had the same deranged notions about women in the workplace as you do.

    Not hard to then understand why it's such a fucked up place to work.

    Harassment takes place. Victim complains. Straga21 is the manager responsible for handling the complaint. 'This is just metoo shit'.

  9. #509
    Quote Originally Posted by TrollHunter3000 View Post
    Is there some logical reason why that would be the case?
    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.

  10. #510
    Quote Originally Posted by TrollHunter3000 View Post
    Doesn't mean they couldn't have been better if other groups of people were included.
    Doesn't mean the applicants could be better if other groups of people were included either.

  11. #511
    Quote Originally Posted by Magnagarde View Post
    If 10 whites guys applied for the job and I needed to hire 5 employees, I'd hire the best 5 white guys because those are the people that applied. It is a very simple logic to follow. I'd do the same if 10 black guys applied and I had to hire 5 employees once again; I'd pick the ones most suitable for the job they're being hired for and it would be only black guys. I wouldn't break my head over how many of this or that group applied because that's an inane thing to do.

    What you don't understand is that diversity hiring and good business practice don't necessarily go hand in hand. That's why you're immediately spewing buzzword classifications.
    Wrong. Diversity when done for diversity's sake can be bad business practice. But when it's properly executed, it's nigh on impossible to be bad.

  12. #512
    Quote Originally Posted by TrollHunter3000 View Post
    There's mountains of evidence that diversity, and more importantly inclusion, factually creates a better work environment. Not just in terms of the employees feeling more included and safe but literally leads to an increase in productive work.
    More

  13. #513
    Quote Originally Posted by Ivarr View Post
    Oh targets based on share of applicants would be profoundly elegant to what's actually happening, which is flat targets regardless of who applies. When companies ignore what goes into the talent pipeline and only focus on what comes out then there's no way people get hired on merit alone.

    EDIT: Sorry for quoting you in two separate posts, I thought it would be fast enough for the auto-merge but this thread is going too fast.
    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.

  14. #514
    Quote Originally Posted by Valkyrst View Post
    Wrong. Diversity when done for diversity's sake can be bad business practice. But when it's properly executed, it's nigh on impossible to be bad.
    Yes, saying wrong followed up with an utopian view on hiring has surely proven me wrong.

  15. #515
    Quote Originally Posted by Magnagarde View Post
    Yes, saying wrong and coming up with an utopian view has surely proven me wrong.
    So properly executed diversity is utopia for you? Which means you don't think it's possible?

    So what is your solution then? Just make the easy hire and keep Magnagarde happy.

    Which is precisely the issue with employment opportunity. It's the convenient hire.

    'My son can do the job' says the CEO. End of story. No equal opportunity. For example. Convenient. Comfort. Not equal opportunity.

  16. #516
    Quote Originally Posted by zorkuus View Post
    "We work to create a more inclusive and diverse workplace" comes with quotas by default.
    If two equally qualified people apply for a job and there is a quota to be filled, the one meeting the requirements of the quota will get the job.
    Incorrect. I feel this is just a lack of you understanding what a "quota" is vs a calculated expectation. A quota in the US is absolutely illegal. The only time what you're describing can occur is when the EEOC approves an affirmative action hiring plan which requires substantial evidence of a history of inequality within a company and this is done extremely rarely.

  17. #517
    Quote Originally Posted by Magnagarde View Post
    If you actually look back on things, you'll see that most of these iconic franchises and their best installments were created by an all-male and all-white team of dudes who were, without any negative connotation, nerds for tabletop RPG games and games in general.
    And also a bunch of sexual harassing assaulters and thus maybe not that worthy of worship.

  18. #518
    Quote Originally Posted by TrollHunter3000 View Post
    I highly advise you educate yourself more on unconscious bias, anecdotal evidence, systemic issues and how they have a large scale impact before you continue giving your opinion on this matter at all.
    Lmao "I advise you indoctrinate yourself more on buzzword buzzword buzzword neomarxism buzzword".

    Yeah haha no, thanks.

  19. #519
    Quote Originally Posted by Valkyrst View Post
    So properly executed diversity is utopia for you? Which means you don't think it's possible?

    So what is your solution then? Just make the easy hire and keep Magnagarde happy.

    Which is precisely the issue with employment opportunity. It's the convenient hire.

    'My son can do the job' says the CEO. End of story. No equal opportunity. For example. Convenient. Comfort. Not equal opportunity.
    I do think it is unachievable because the goal of it is an equal amount of different people, not equal opportunity to people that actually deserve it.

    The solution is to make the most senseful hire according to a number of criteria, which I've listed numerous times before. These most definitely do not include a specific race, specific sex, specific ethnic or religious backgrounds.

  20. #520
    Quote Originally Posted by Valkyrst View Post
    Let's just assume for a second that people do get a job to meet quotas. If that's the case, let's make recruitment more transparent.

    So that everyone gets EQUAL opportunity. So let's use his example. If the white dude who plays table top games gets a transparent answer as to why Becky got it, and it's because she's damn fucking good at the job, he should surely be happy then. He can't then cry about quotas.
    Why would we assume that? Do you have evidence?

Posting Permissions

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