"Hiring based on merit" is obviously not. Declaring that you don't like fluffy CV's (which obviously has nothing to do with merit) BECAUSE you "hire based on merit" certainly can be.

I'm not saying people need to hire based on who's got a better photo on their resume. I'm saying that you shouldn't be surprised when people take your rhetoric about that stuff as a signal that you aren't going to be as fair a boss as you might think you are.

And maybe that's unfair. I've certainly never worked for you. But you need to be willing to market to free spirits if you actually want to hire the best people.

I am not the grandparent.

However, I really am a free spirit, having an exceptionally non-traditional path than most, and that is actually a good reason to want to work for someone who values skills and results foremost.

You're still arguing against a strawman. I'm NOT saying that you need to "value" fluffy junk on a CV. I'm saying that IF YOU PUBLICLY DISAPPROVE of that stuff (which we both agree is irrelevant to qualifications, right?) that you're driving away employees you might want, if you really valued skills and results foremost.

Don't be judgy about irrelevant stuff, is my point. Some people don't want to work for judgy conservatives, basically.

1. societies before us have seen the consequences of nepotism and corruption.

2. it is critical to remove subconscious bias in the hiring process.

3. the only effective means to do so as a society is to handicap those who take advantage of subconscious biases.

marketing in itself is less than a zero-sum game; it's players are parasites on the working class. we should all do our part to reduce it's effects.

Those are fine opinions. And if you hire based on them, you're going to annoy and drive away otherwise talented folks who want to talk about their pets, brag about their surfing habits, and stuff emojis into their resume. And that's fine. You guys wouldn't like each other anyway.

"parasites on the working class" indeed.