(1) Networking and building a reputation for yourself will always have value.

(2) Most of the things that he's listed are merits. Being involved in his community, having a strong verifiable previous job history with good references, etc.

(3) Having a good job history, making friends, and being involved in online and offline communities are not things limited to white males.

You are completely missing the parent's point. They say that this is one of the examples where hires are not performed 100% based on merit but that existing networks and references are an important aspect, without denying that this person did not have the merits to be hired.

Also, yes, good job histories, friends and communities are not limited to white males. But they have a strong component of inertia: if those communities, jobs and friend networks have something in common (e.g., gender) it is only normal that they attract persons with that trait and therefore the bias persists. Changing that is difficult and takes time and effort.

I'm curious if you believe this comment belongs to both the Freemason association and "mr_bill on efnet #unix IRC in the 90s", or only one of them? I'd 100% agree on the former, but not the latter.

In re (3), the post specifically mentions the Masons, which traditionally is extremely exclusive, men-only, excludes Catholics, etc.

They've opened up slightly in response to pressure, and there are some female freemasons, but it's still pretty exclusive.

We have plenty of Catholic members. The Masons didn't exclude Catholics, the Pope banned membership in Masonry by Catholics because he considered the organization a threat to his authority. That ban is pretty much ignored nowdays.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papal_ban_of_Freemasonry

The Knights of Columbus was formed as a "Catholic equivalent of Freemasonry", basically.

The masons was an anecdote specific to that commenter, my point was that there are many different types of groups that serve the same purpose.

At the very least, I think pjc50's observation highlights that there is a certain inertia in some industries that perpetuates a bias toward one or the other gender.

Edit: changed a couple of words to make my point clearer.

Well if we're doing anecdotes, I work for the second largest IT firm in my country, and the management is largely made up of women, and I don't believe any of them to be freemasons.

Perhaps this observation has more to do with location and culture than it does industry.

Sorry, my point wasn't really about Freemasons in particular, but I'm too tired now to try to clarify.

Do you know any of them to be Catholic?

Order of the Eastern star.

>exclude Catholics,

>but it's still pretty exclusive.

Catholics are a juggernaut, the global leader in that market. I'd say it was required strategy in order to avoid a squeeze-out. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Squeeze-out

Speaking about meritocracy.

1.) We laughed, shook hands and they headhunted me away

The headhunt started on very little information - basically on how he laugh and shakes of hand. Had likely proved himself later, but it was all was on instant first impression - where biases matter most.

2.) Freemason

How is that related to merit in tech? Yes, similar "we have thing in common" bias happen everywhere (and may advantage women in other context), but is not merit. Had he be a women that got hired on sewing hobby or membership in feminist organization, it would still not be meritocracy.

3.) making friends, and being involved in online and offline communities are not things limited to white males

Absolutely, in other context it would advantage women or whoever. However, they advantage people with same hobbies and interests as whoever is already in. They are not merit in any meaningful sense of word, just like call of duty is not merit or world of warcraft is not merit.

I am not saying that any of it is some horrible act or happens only in tech. It is not. Neither is it merit no matter how much tech people like to pretend real world is meritocracy.

> The headhunt started on very little information - basically on how he laugh and shakes of hand. Had likely proved himself later, but it was all was on instant first impression - where biases matter most.

No, they already had a previous relation: "[...] from the Oklahoma City-based ISP I'd started my career at and left in '96" (emphasis added). Given mrbill had worked for/with them (three years prior), they definitely had much more information than just a first impression.

>The headhunt started on very little information -

At least read the comment before trying to troll. They headhunted him because he had already worked for them. It's hard to get more information than that.

>no matter how much tech people like to pretend real world is meritocracy.

We are talking highly technical people, what merit did OP not have?

It sounded like OP had 2 decades of experience in his niche.

I really dont care if I hire men, women, or any race. I really dont. As long as you show up and get the job done, wonderful. Many people disappoint and my current contractor is a white male, and I dont care.

1.) Meritocracy is much stronger claim then just lack of sexism or racism.

2.) I am saying that non-meritoratio properties gives an individual advantage over other individuals with the same merit. That does not mean that former is stupid or incapable. It just means that real world if more messy then we like to pretend.

Why make this black and white?

A person in a niche has the requirements to get hired. They 'knew' someone from 20 years of working in this field.

At what point does it no longer become merit? They met the person at work, working on tech. Its not like they were born into it.

Also, I highly doubt 'same merit' is a thing in the tech world(especially among programmers). Programmers are rare and expensive, I doubt HR is choosy when it comes to these things. They have a difficult enough time filling positions.

Yes, we know that happens.

However, to clarify, some of those were ppl he never met (but eventually did). Ultimately it's about trust. That is, can I trust this person can do the job __and__ work with the team.

People who are not will to "put themselves out there" are going to be at a disadvantage. Not all doors open easily. Too need to be knocked on again and again and again.

In a way, some of the examples actually provide hope.

Giving enough of a shit to hang out on IRC is a merit. Most of the rest are anecdotes about having a long career. The only sketchy bit is the Mason thing.

Do women not attend social clubs? Because that’s what IRC channels and the Freemasons both are: social clubs.

Or, do women with hiring authority just not preferentially hire contacts from social clubs? (A good test case: are there as many “same sorority” coworkers as “same fraternity” coworkers, in proportion to the number of each gender with hiring authority in that company?)

Or, do women just end up in fewer positions with hiring authority?

Even if all aspects of two groups were equal -- sociability and preference to hire from one's own social circles -- you can still have a rich-get-richer effect. Group A has many more people in hiring authority positions for historical reasons, so continues to preferentially hire from their social group, which is also mostly group A. Meanwhile Group B is doing the exact same thing, but has fewer people in power so things don't equalize out.

The last point is certainly a "yes" overall.

Junior Leagues are great example of women's social groups that are quite influential. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Junior_League

If they are not using this forum, and hold firm to ^ statement please don't point them here, but rather share the post's contents with them on efnet