| Forum Index > Closed |
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please. In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On March 03 2018 01:47 Danglars wrote: What’s funnier: Snopes fact-checking satire, or FaceBook worried that garden-variety over-the-top satire is fake news? What if it is all satire? | ||
|
Acrofales
Spain18487 Posts
| ||
|
Doodsmack
United States7224 Posts
On March 03 2018 01:36 LegalLord wrote: I dunno, I’m pleased enough with how it’s going and think Trump is finally doing what he was supposed to have done a year ago. So you think trade wars are a good thing, understood. | ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
Walking into a polling place with a T-shirt containing the text of the second amendment might be political and banned by law in Minnesota, but the text of the first amendment would not be. According to a lawyer defending the law/application. Argued before the Supreme Court of the United States this week. | ||
|
Acrofales
Spain18487 Posts
On March 03 2018 02:09 Danglars wrote: https://twitter.com/hashtaggriswold/status/969231416453189632 Walking into a polling place with a T-shirt containing the text of the second amendment might be political and banned by law in Minnesota, but the text of the first amendment would not be. According to a lawyer defending the law/application. Argued before the Supreme Court of the United States this week. How the fuck did a case this retarded make it all the way to the supreme court? | ||
Seeker
Where dat snitch at?37124 Posts
 TL would normally celebrate stuff like that but not for this thread | ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
On March 03 2018 02:12 Acrofales wrote: How the fuck did a case this retarded make it all the way to the supreme court? Circuit courts in this country are a disgrace. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On March 03 2018 02:12 Acrofales wrote: How the fuck did a case this retarded make it all the way to the supreme court? It is an interesting case. They ban people standing outside of a polling place within a specific distance from wearing a shirt or advocating for a specific candidate, but not within the polling place. This is to prevent people from messing with voters. Prior to those laws, your boss would hang out at the polls to In theory, it means that someone can’t avoid the existing law by hanging out within the polling place or while voting. There is also the problem that some of the polling places get so backed up that line extends outside the poll, which means that the law, which is a legal gray area from my understanding. I expect the Supreme court will carve out some exception for someone during the act of voting, but still prohibit it within the polling place. | ||
|
hunts
United States2113 Posts
On March 03 2018 01:36 LegalLord wrote: I dunno, I’m pleased enough with how it’s going and think Trump is finally doing what he was supposed to have done a year ago. Destroyed America from within? | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States24504 Posts
I prefer to think of Trump as the finest of silk robes | ||
|
hunts
United States2113 Posts
On March 03 2018 02:29 GreenHorizons wrote: I prefer to think of Trump as the finest of silk robes Revealing the garbage that is our political system? Edit: and the garbage that is most of our politicians, and the corruption that people other than trump and his administration are much better at concealing | ||
|
farvacola
United States18875 Posts
On March 03 2018 02:23 Plansix wrote: It is an interesting case. They ban people standing outside of a polling place within a specific distance from wearing a shirt or advocating for a specific candidate, but not within the polling place. In theory, it means that someone can’t avoid the existing law by hanging out within the polling place or while voting. There is also the problem that some of the polling places get so backed up that line extends outside the poll, which means that the law, which is a legal gray area from my understanding. I expect the Supreme court will carve out some exception for someone during the act of voting, but still prohibit it within the polling place. It's worth noting that the Plaintiffs did a shit job at both the district court and circuit court levels in terms of establishing that the law was amenable to differential treatment; the 8th Circuit opinion expressly points out that the Plaintiffs outright failed to provide the court with any evidence that anyone not associated with the tea party was treated differently. In other words, they failed to set forth facts in support of their allegations. | ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15743 Posts
Taking a million steps back, are there reasons unrelated to culture and inclusion bullshit that companies do affirmative action stuff? Is there a tax benefit or anything like that? It always feels like companies are aiming for a certain number of racial composition or something. What is the selfish reason for it? I refuse to believe it is purely charity. Affirmative action has its place, but only in school admission in my eyes. And it should be focused on economic conditions rather than racial. Or at least mostly economic. There are still major societal reasons to make sure blacks and other disproportionately impacted minorities to have more role models and whatnot. But at the core, the reason for affirmative action is the fact that communities and families end up cyclic. A shitty mom goes on to raise a shitty kid, who gets pregnant just as early as her mom, meaning she goes on to raise another shitty kid, who then also does not go to college and also has a kid at 16. We as a society have a purely selfish, financial incentive to make sure theses cycles end. People who are a drain on society can become a benefit to society. The country benefits from ending these cycles. It is worth our money to invest in ending these cycles. These types of people are expensive for the government. It is a good investment to make them self sufficient through schooling. But if 10% of CS graduates are women, it isn't possible for companies to hire 50% women and 50% men. If companies are going to try to meet diversity requirements, they should at least make them realistic. If only 1% of CS graduates are Hispanic, no need to plan on having more than that working for you. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
Weirdly enough, our cultures and how we grew up matters and impacts who we are. It is easier to create a work environment that functions around these things. And those are some of the many reasons why it is a good idea. | ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15743 Posts
On March 03 2018 02:42 Plansix wrote: Companies want diverse work forces because it lowers the risk of liability due to discrimination and sexism. It is a lot harder for shitty, systematic discrimination in a system if half of the decision makers are minorities or women. More women on the staff and in management reduces the risk problems with HR about family leave and so on. It also avoids unforced errors in marketing or other PR, since you have people on your staff that will say stuff like: “Yo that is dangerously close to black face, which is that a problem.” Weirdly enough, our cultures and how we grew up matters and impacts who we are. It is easier to create a work environment that functions around these things. And those are some of the many reasons why it is a good idea. I don't know what you mean by this. | ||
|
Dangermousecatdog
United Kingdom7084 Posts
| ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
|
xDaunt
United States17988 Posts
On March 03 2018 02:42 Plansix wrote: Companies want diverse work forces because it lowers the risk of liability due to discrimination and sexism. It is a lot harder for shitty, systematic discrimination in a system if half of the decision makers are minorities or women. More women on the staff and in management reduces the risk problems with HR about family leave and so on. It also avoids unforced errors in marketing or other PR, since you have people on your staff that will say stuff like: “Yo that is dangerously close to black face, which is that a problem.” Weirdly enough, our cultures and how we grew up matters and impacts who we are. It is easier to create a work environment that functions around these things. And those are some of the many reasons why it is a good idea. Yes, there's certainly a component of forcing diversity so as to lower the risk of discrimination claims, but companies are generally well-past the statistical threshold of where they'd get in trouble on a disparate impact claim. In reality, this is more about PR than anything else (though I'd argue that, particularly in the tech industry, there are true SJW believers who are using companies as platforms for social/political engineering). "Diversity" has become a buzzword in corporate circles and is seen as desirable for public image purposes. This is all a product of the current prevalence of identity politics. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
Like a week ago I told the story of the school that made dress code that totally ended up discriminating black girls. That could have been easily avoided by having a couple black women on staff who would have said, “black girls get extensions for reasons we shouldn’t make rule against.” But they didn’t and stupidly doubled down on that rule. That is what I am talking about. It is just unforced errors that could be avoid by just having someone in the room how isn’t exactly like you. On March 03 2018 02:59 xDaunt wrote: Yes, there's certainly a component of forcing diversity so as to lower the risk of discrimination claims, but companies are generally well-past the statistical threshold of where they'd get in trouble on a disparate impact claim. In reality, this is more about PR than anything else (though I'd argue that, particularly in the tech industry, there are true SJW believers who are using companies as platforms for social/political engineering). "Diversity" has become a buzzword in corporate circles and is seen as desirable for public image purposes. This is all a product of the current prevalence of identity politics. It is also internal pressure. It is far easier to avoid conflict if the company shows it gives a shit about these issues. People don't like working for places that actively don't give a shit. Meeting the minority quote to tamp down on discrimination claims isn't really enough for most people I know. | ||
|
Mercy13
United States718 Posts
On March 03 2018 02:35 Mohdoo wrote: Reading more about this youtube or google or whatever hiring thing, super fucked up. What a disaster. Hope they get utterly slammed for messing up this bad. It is hilarious to see how good intentions can go so badly. Taking a million steps back, are there reasons unrelated to culture and inclusion bullshit that companies do affirmative action stuff? Is there a tax benefit or anything like that? It always feels like companies are aiming for a certain number of racial composition or something. What is the selfish reason for it? I refuse to believe it is purely charity. Affirmative action has its place, but only in school admission in my eyes. And it should be focused on economic conditions rather than racial. Or at least mostly economic. There are still major societal reasons to make sure blacks and other disproportionately impacted minorities to have more role models and whatnot. But at the core, the reason for affirmative action is the fact that communities and families end up cyclic. A shitty mom goes on to raise a shitty kid, who gets pregnant just as early as her mom, meaning she goes on to raise another shitty kid, who then also does not go to college and also has a kid at 16. We as a society have a purely selfish, financial incentive to make sure theses cycles end. People who are a drain on society can become a benefit to society. The country benefits from ending these cycles. It is worth our money to invest in ending these cycles. These types of people are expensive for the government. It is a good investment to make them self sufficient through schooling. But if 10% of CS graduates are women, it isn't possible for companies to hire 50% women and 50% men. If companies are going to try to meet diversity requirements, they should at least make them realistic. If only 1% of CS graduates are Hispanic, no need to plan on having more than that working for you. I agree basing hiring solely on quotas is stupid, but there is lots of research which suggests that diverse work forces perform better: Striving to increase workplace diversity is not an empty slogan — it is a good business decision. A 2015 McKinsey report on 366 public companies found that those in the top quartile for ethnic and racial diversity in management were 35% more likely to have financial returns above their industry mean, and those in the top quartile for gender diversity were 15% more likely to have returns above the industry mean. ... In a nutshell, enriching your employee pool with representatives of different genders, races, and nationalities is key for boosting your company’s joint intellectual potential. Creating a more diverse workplace will help to keep your team members’ biases in check and make them question their assumptions. At the same time, we need to make sure the organization has inclusive practices so that everyone feels they can be heard. All of this can make your teams smarter and, ultimately, make your organization more successful, whatever your goals. Source | ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Dota 2 League of Legends Counter-Strike Heroes of the Storm Other Games tarik_tv4994 summit1g3791 Grubby2479 FrodaN1031 shahzam350 PiGStarcraft295 C9.Mang0204 Fuzer  197syndereN181 XaKoH  138NeuroSwarm56 ViBE39 KnowMe37 ZombieGrub35 Railgan25 JuggernautJason20 |
|
IntoTheTV X SOOP
Reynor vs Solar
ByuN vs SHIN
Clem vs MaxPax
herO vs Rogue
IPSL
WorsT vs nOmaD
Dewalt vs andersOn
AI Arena Tournament
IntoTheTV X SOOP
IPSL
Azhi_Dahaki vs ggnore13
Double vs WIZARD
Replay Cast
Replay Cast
Sparkling Tuna Cup
WardiTV Invitational
YoungYakov vs Lambo
SHIN vs TBD
Percival vs Shameless
Solar vs TBD
PiGosaur Cup
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
