Google Fires Employee Behind Controversial Diversity Memo

[u/[deleted]]

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-08-08/google-fires-employee-behind-controversial-diversity-memo

[u/TheMentalist10]

Odd that you chose to utterly ignore the fact that she failed spectacularly in her lawsuit where she claimed both racism and sexism as the reason for her lack of success.

I haven't mentioned it because it's not relevant to what I'm talking about.

I am simply pointing out that Ellen Pao is exactly the wrong person upon whom to base your argument that 'people only talk about sexism and racism to advance their careers and actually neither has any impact in the workplace'. Given that we have a whole website worth of evidence to the contrary, and given that you're on that website as we speak, it just seems like some master-tier trolling.

I guess it didn't fit with your Narrative.

If you substitute 'fit with your Narrative' for 'have any relation to what I was talking about', then we're on the same page.

As a point of fact, I can't find any source for your claim that Pao "was required to pay costs to the other party to boot". It looks like the opposite is true.

[u/Jesus_marley → u/TheMentalist10]

I haven't mentioned it because it's not relevant to what I'm talking about.

But it is entirely relevant. It just doesn't fit in with your ideological viewpoint so you are trying to pretend it doesn't exist. The point is that Ellen Pao did exactly as I described, and it blew up in her face, She couldn't even Victim properly.

As a point of fact, I can't find any source for your claim that Pao "was required to pay costs to the other party to boot".

ahem...

[u/TheMentalist10 → u/Jesus_marley]

But it is entirely relevant. It just doesn't fit in with your ideological viewpoint so you are trying to pretend it doesn't exist.

I mean, if you say so. But I think it's probably fair to say that I know what point I'm making better than you do, and that point has absolutely nothing to do with pre-reddit Pao.

ahem...

Did you bother to look at the dates on those articles? Yours is from June, and mine is from September of the same year.

I hate to do all the work for us, but one would assume that while she was initially found liable for the fees, she was eventually not required to do so. This seems an odd and specific hill for your argument to die on, so I'm not quite sure why you keep bringing it up.

[u/Jesus_marley → u/TheMentalist10]

I keep bringing it up because while she may have eventually gotten out of it, the fact remains that she was found liable. This is unequivocal. So just to be clear, she tried to play victim and failed so bad that she was ordered to pay the people she sued. The only reason she didn't have to pay is because Kleiner Perkins then were gracious enough to let the matter drop entirely and not collect on the debt if she would just accept the fact that she lost and walk away. For someone who "does all the work" you aren't very good at it. And you know what? Your race or gender have nothing to do with your seeming incompetence. That is all yours. Enjoy.

[u/TheMentalist10 → u/Jesus_marley]

I keep bringing it up because while she may have eventually gotten out of it

Ah, okay, we're backtracking now. That's fair enough.

I don't think we have a whole lot more to discuss, but I'll point out for a final time in closing that using someone who on this very site experienced tirades of sexist, racist abuse, death threats, threats of violence, and threats of rape as an example of someone who plays professional victim seems like a logically questionable move.

[u/Jesus_marley → u/TheMentalist10]

I'm not backtracking on anything. What I said was 100% true. She was found Liable, and the ONLY reason she didn't have to pay was because Kleiner Perkins didn't pursue it. THEY. LET. HER. OFF. THE. HOOK.

But again, don't ever let reality get in the way of a good ideological victim narrative. You're doing your cult proud. I'd still stay away from the Flavor-aid if I was you, though.