Well, the thing is, at least based on the article, Burton- the accused groomer/pedophile/sexual assaulter- does not work for Google. If he did, I'm all for firing him right into the Sun. The article makes no allegations that any of the people employed by Google participated in or covered up the sexual assaults, just that they were members of a organization led by a sexual assaulter. I just get a little antsy about firing people who are not themselves accused of sexual assault- or even accused of direct knowledge and coverup of the assaults, because I don't see a clear and convenient way to differentiate the Fellowship of Friends from the Southern Baptist Convention from the Boy Scouts of America, (unless you want to ban all "cults" and think that can stick).

I don't know more about the FoF than what's in the article, but I've done some reading about a similar sexual assault ridden cult, NXIUM, and their the hierarchy was such that clearly some people were assaulting, and some were assaulted (and some were on both sides at different points), and I would want to be damn sure that I was firing people on the assaulting side but not the people on the assaulted side of the line, and for the people who were both... I dunno, really hard question.

At the risk of sounding a little heartless, someone that joins a cult is very gullible.

How can you be that gullible and still be considered top tier talent?

Calling BSA and SBC cults is pure word play on your part. No reasonable person believes these are cults.

I never called BSA and SBC cults, but I don't think that firing people because they are part of a cult, absent any other evidence of any wrong-doing, is a good idea: it seems like it would only feed into their isolation, sense of persecution, etc. It would be a concrete step that the cult leader can point to about how the world is not to be trusted and pull the flock closer to the leader.

As for gullibility: would you support firing anyone who has been the VICTIM of domestic violence? A lot of the ways that cults convince people to stay are similar to the ways that domestic abusers convince their victims to stay, the methods are remarkably similar. So would being a victim of long-running abusive relationship be a sign that one isn't top tier talent in a job? Should all of them be fired? If you find yourself horrified by that idea, then I would suggest that you are being rather too aggressive towards cults, and forgetting that probably a majority of the cults members are more victim than perpetrator, though doubtless many are both to some degree.

> How can you be that gullible and still be considered top tier talent?

Easily? I don't think there is any reason to think people good at programming are any less susciptible to being manipulated than anyone else.