So guilty by association ? That's healthy...

What's truly sad about this is that he is the first I've heard of to propose actually fair measures we could take to promote gender diversity in IT, such as using more socially involved methods such as pair programming. Instead we get positive discrimination.

This depiction by tech crunch is an insult to reporting, if you read/listen to the primary source, there is no hate, no sexism, no racism, he just saw unfair stuff and spoke out about it.

Yeah, even if you look at the comments here damning Damore, it's obvious most commenters didn't bother to read - hell, to even skim the primary source.

The memo was as polite scientificly-backed and clearly written as it was reasonably possible without turning it into an academic publication. The only mistake he made (while at Google; I was really surprised by the on-line crowd that he found itself with after being ejected from his workplace) was not realizing that he's not dealing with a rational audience, in Google or elsewhere.

I was kind of hoping more of hacker news though =/ This does not bode well...

It's not just "association" as you put it. r/the_donald was singing is his praises. They're a pretty toxic bunch and I've found that I have very little in common with many of them (mostly because I find their views to be <insert any negative adjective>). So when they're the only people I see coming to someone's defense I assume that person said or did something pretty bad.

Mike Cernovich is the same way. He's looking to push a narrative to further his own agenda. An agenda and narrative I find gross and offensive. So he thinks Damore fits into that narrative. That is a not so subtle hint to me that Damore is saying something gross and offensive.

It's not the best way of judging things for sure but I don't think it served me poorly here.

You give too much power to these toxic groups, I recommend just ignoring them completely. The alternative is basically giving them the ability to censor what you read, litmus or not, seems unwise. I know nothing of Cernovich sorry. It certainly served you poorly here. His infamous memo is the best, most scientifically literate proposal towards more diversity in IT, its portrayal is truly discouraging.

It didn't censor what I read though. I read the memo fully. I thought it wasn't particularly interesting. Then I saw who did. I'm not sure what you think I missed.

Well his sum up suggests two things: If we are to be truly free and diverse, we shouldn't expect perfect representation everywhere (ie. may be it's not a problem that 50% of lumberjacks aren't women), and to make engineering more diverse, the current approach (positive discrimination) is unfair, we should instead embrace gender differences and modify methodology in IT to be more female oriented, he suggests pair programming based on psychological research indicating women are more people oriented, and men more thing oriented. There is no value judgment there, just a sound, scientifically literate approach to change.

I'll put it another way: if you found his memo non interesting, you are not interested in science, in making the workplace more diverse, in being fair and open, and you will have no part in whistle-blowing.

I found it not interesting because it didn't feel very scientific like you said. It sounded like a high schooler's argument and was cited like one. Your condescending tone is appreciated.

Well I think those things are important and interesting. Your appreciation of "sounding like" is failing you and us on our road to inclusivity.

> I hate to judge someone by the company they keep

This is literally the way we (as humans) are built to test veracity. Only in a few cases does this litmus test fail.

It's a good test, just like "follow the money". It can be abused (joe jobs, false flags), but works a vast majority of the time.

It's a demerit to him that he accepted their support, but it is also a demerit on the entire rest of society that the only ones who offered him support were the alt-right.

I'd be interested to know whether more liberal media/shows extended invitations to him (that he declined?), or whether it was only conservative platforms that allowed him to present his case.

The Guardian interviewed him. https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/nov/16/james-dam...

When the memo came out, the Guardian reported that news outlets contacted him and Damore went with anti-feminist youtubers for a more friendly reception. https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/aug/09/james-dam...

Thanks for the info.

> Damore went with anti-feminist youtubers for a more friendly reception

Maybe understandable, but disappointing.

> But then the dude appeared on Mike Cernovich's show and was all over r/the_donald and I was like, "oh this is who this guy is." I hate to judge someone by the company they keep but this guy's company was particularly bad (imo).

I got the impression that he accepted those interviews because they were the only ones that would be conducted fairly. Especially considering he was subjected to at least one hostile and unfair interview.

We can't have a world where you can destroy somebody by endorsing them. This turns every undesirable into a perfect hitman.

>> I got the impression that he accepted those interviews because they were the only ones that would be conducted fairly.

An exact opposite bias doesn't cancel out into fairness.