When you have media telling ppl what the memo "basically" said, saying the opposite, and people believing it, we are in dark times.
-
-
-
Yes, absolutely.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Agree with @patking70. It's about profit, but best response to
#GoogleMemo came from@YonatanZunger. https://medium.com/@yonatanzunger/so-about-this-googlers-manifesto-1e3773ed1788 … /1 -
Thought experiment: The opposite manifesto could easily have been written. /2
-
On average, men are statistically unsuited to working in cooperative environments. Now this is not meant to attack individual men /3
-
That's not what he wrote, though. There was no argument or implication about suitability, just INTEREST. Choices.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
1/ Corporate policy does not serve the CEO, or the employees, or any particular ideology. Corporate policy and decision making (at the fired
-
2/ for memo level) is about serving the corporate business interest. Always. Few seem to think/discuss this yet its true. Meaning, he was
-
3/ fired not really because anybody decided he was wrong or right. Rather, because they decided Google would financially fare better and/or
-
4/ be sued less if they fired him. They had to choose between his termination suit vs more hostile environment lawsuits. Attracting talent
-
5/ like him vs talent that dislikes him. And so on. That's all there is to "policy" here. Folks read it way to ideologically. Though it
-
6/ (*too*). Though it means there is purpose in actions like his; if his thoughts were mainstream, policy would protect *him* not SJW dogma.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.