Hey moron, this wasn't some small whiner, but a co-founder and critical figure in the TinkerPop management team.
But thank God ASF corporate got involved, overrode the Apache Project Management Committee and fired him over some dank memes.
FFS, you worthless assholes who've never accomplished anything in your miserable lives must live for moments like this where you can take real visionaries like Marko and treat them like the crap you are.
Now everyone using TinkerPop is going to have to start asking hard ques
If a corporation has rules for conduct, and you break them, why are you at all surprised.
I don't know about this project, or the person. But anytime someone whines about "woke" culture, you'll usually find that person engages in cyberbullying, trolling, libertarian, conservative, or otherwise wacky right-wing conspiracies.
All I can find connected to the guy is a twitter full of images while complaining about cancel culture.
He didn't do any of this on company time or in any official capacity. His twitter feed barely even has any followers. This is a ridiculous level of PC bullshit.
He is currently the only source of information about why he was removed. He has plenty of reason to be dishonest about what happened. Why don't you wait for more information?
He is currently the only source of information about why he was removed. He has plenty of reason to be dishonest about what happened. Why don't you wait for more information?
If you read TFA, an ASF board member resigned over it, seeming to corroborate his account.
The claim that Rodriguez published his tweets to the private@tinkerpop mailing list are untrue, insisted Hedhman, as he said is the claim that Rodriguez used the ASF resources to humiliate people.
There's still a lack of information, but that's another point of data from someone directly involved.
He is currently the only source of information about why he was removed. He has plenty of reason to be dishonest about what happened. Why don't you wait for more information?
If you read TFA, an ASF board member resigned over it, seeming to corroborate his account.
Well, that can mean that they share opinions.
There is some irony in that he's up in arms about Woke culture and PC'ism. People who get fired from Google often claim of the opposite, because they are fired because they are "woke" - like the recent firing of Margaret Mitchell and Timnit Gebru.
These folks have played a very active part in their dismissal. And pretty impressive that they blame the opposite things.
If you are a leader, you are expected to act like one.
"Woke" people fired from Google tend to be fired for stuff that goes directly against employer's interest - leaking confidential internal info (including code), sabotaging projects, breaking NDAs, or faking evidence against other employees to have them fired.
"Woke" people fired from Google tend to be fired for stuff that goes directly against employer's interest - leaking confidential internal info (including code), sabotaging projects, breaking NDAs, or faking evidence against other employees to have them fired.
They don't get fired for memes on Twitter.
Let's use an example.
If you have a top person in your company who despite being very competent, goes on Twitter to post inflammatory shit, perhaps even calls for say, creating gas cambers for whoever his enemies were. You pick which group, because I merely show that left or right, it's similar. You apparently want it to apply only to the persecution of the right - okay, we'll work with your view.
Your attention is drawn to his posts, because some people don't believe in gassing people.
If you have a top person in your company who despite being very competent, goes on Twitter to post inflammatory shit, perhaps even calls for say, creating gas cambers for whoever his enemies were. (...) What are you going to do? Keep him on staff? Because you will then be associated with his postings as a supporter of them.
That very scenario happened at Disney. The fired "The Mandalorian" actress Gina Carano for her bad-taste right-wing tweets, including a final one of a meme comparing Republicans cancelled by Democrats to Jewish persecuted by N@azis (thanks, lameness filter!), but they didn't fire "The Mandalorian" actor Pedro Pascal for his bad-taste left-wing tweets, among which there's one of a meme asking for children of Trump supporters to be killed.
By your reasoning, Disney would want to be associated with neither QAno
If you have a top person in your company who despite being very competent, goes on Twitter to post inflammatory shit, perhaps even calls for say, creating gas cambers for whoever his enemies were. (...) What are you going to do? Keep him on staff? Because you will then be associated with his postings as a supporter of them.
>By your reasoning, Disney would want to be associated with neither QAnon conspiracy theorizing nor with apologies for mass murder, but they seem to be pretty fine with the later simply because it's from a mostly left-wing actor. Which begs the question: how extreme must left-wing tweets be for a company such as Disney to fire someone over them? If even the apology of mass murder isn't enough, I wonder whether such a line even exists.
By my rationale, you don't get to play whataboutism. If you worked for me and you posted far right or far left wing shit, your ass would be escorted out by armed guard. Do you understand? My company - my rules according to law.
In fact, why do you try to point me out as being a hypocrite, when I have nothing to do with Disney. It's their company, and in an at will world, their rules. At will is pretty much the law of the land, and if your employer does not like the color of your socks, they are completely j
why do you try to point me out as being a hypocrite
I didn't. I pointed Disney's case as a counterexample to what I perceived as a generalization in the sections of your post I quoted, according which a company wouldn't want to be associated with inflammatory remarks. Disney shows that companies do want to be, or at least doesn't mind being, associated with inflammatory remarks as long as those remarks are inflammatory in one direction, not the other.
if your employer does not like the color of your socks, they are completely justified and allowed by law to fire you
True. Too bad all these companies have lobbied governments all around to the point neither you nor I are actu
why do you try to point me out as being a hypocrite
I didn't. I pointed Disney's case as a counterexample to what I perceived as a generalization in the sections of your post I quoted,
Yeah, but you are assuming that since this guy was right wing, I was supporting left wing asshattery. I was not. That Disney may have not acted upon the Mandalorian stars actions, doesn''t mean I support him.
You "Whatabout"ed the TinkerPop case with your Google counter-example and a fictional case to try and case the TinkerPop example into more of a business setting. The followup demonstrated your example in fact played out in real life, but in a demonstrably one-sided, double-standard-ish way.
All of which is to illustrate that in real life, your Google & what-if examples are different in that they are much rarer and it involved an employee's actions that were at least in part directly work related (versu
You "Whatabout"ed the TinkerPop case with your Google counter-example and a fictional case to try and case the TinkerPop example into more of a business setting. The followup demonstrated your example in fact played out in real life, but in a demonstrably one-sided, double-standard-ish way.
All of which is to illustrate that in real life, your Google & what-if examples are different in that they are much rarer and it involved an employee's actions that were at least in part directly work related (versus punishing a volunteer by kicking him out of his project for non-work related matters).
"What if" is not "whataboutism", muchacho.
What if is asking if another situation is applicable.
Whataboutism is trying to make a person look like a hypocrite by an example of an inconsistency. It's like say, country A claims that country B did something bad, so country B says Country A has done the same bad thing. It's a dopey argument, because it ends up claiming to support the supposed hypocrite is guilty of nothing, because the person playing whataboutism is exonerating the supposed hypocrite country
He is currently the only source of information about why he was removed. He has plenty of reason to be dishonest about what happened. Why don't you wait for more information?
This is a little like the Ethics manager at Google being canned for performing unethical practices.
Gather round kids, and take some telling. As an olde farte, I've seen my share of people being fired. To a person, they have a litany of excuses as to why, and I've never heard one exclaim that it was their fault.
When in fact, they all had an integral part in their dismissal.
PC happens on the right as well as the left. Time to get used to the modern society where no one approves of anything if it doesn't fit into their tight dogma.
Can you provide some examples of "PC happening on the right"? Or whatever you view the opposite of this to really be. The only times I've seen leftists censored is when they post absolutely horrendous racism or call explicitly for violence, and it's usually not anyone important.
Comic books. Rock music. McCarthyism. The often passed around story about Charlton Heston censoring Ice-T for the song Cop Killer. Or this: https://familyguy.fandom.com/w... [fandom.com]
So yeah, plenty of PC on the right, for their own version of political correctness.
> Comic books. Rock music. You're correct, but there's a few differences. In the case of comic books, nobody fired people for holding leftwing views- instead we saw government enforced censorship. In the case of rock music, we DEFINITELY didn't see people getting fired for holding leftwing views- if anything, corporations jumping on that bandwagon gave a massive credibility boost to random rockers. And in both cases, we see stuff that stopped happening MOSTLY around fifty years ago. > McCarthyism Much
Or how about this? https://www.news.com.au/lifest... [news.com.au]
It's not like she advertized herself, and it was the other parents who actually printed out the pictures to send to the school. Her children had nothing to do with it either, and yet they're the ones being punished. Absolutely none of the children at the school were exposed to it and could not possibly have been harmed by it were it not for the other parents making a big deal about it. Tons of right-wing PC censorship and cancelling goes unreported.
Tons of right-wing PC censorship and cancelling goes unreported.
Not really. There aren't a lot of Moms who have their husbands take X-rated pictures and videos of themselves and sell them to the tune of $1,800,000 a year. That's definitely going to make people sit up and take notice, especially if word of such a "family business" gets out into a school setting with children involved. Definitely will ruffle some feathers, to be sure.
But it's nothing like the tidal waves of PC we're all being flooded with fro
There aren't a lot of Moms who have their husbands take X-rated pictures
It was an example, genius.
especially if word of such a "family business" gets out into a school setting with children involved.
Did you even read the story? No children were involved. The only reason it "got out" were the parents reporting it. It wouldn't have gotten out otherwise, so those parents were the ones getting it out into a school setting with children involved.
But it's nothing like the tidal waves of PC we're all being flooded with from the left. Nothing.
I gave examples in my other reply, but sure, pretend they don't exist.
I'm a real big fan of that second picture, that bondagemilf thing she's got going is pretty great.
On topic though, this counts, but you have to admit it's at technicality. She hasn't lost her livelihood (in fact I bet this article is amazing promotion), and presumably had her kids kicked out of some super conservative private school that she selected for its religious values. I don't understand exactly why they would take their anger at her sexy pictures out on her kids, but I do un
Can you provide some examples of "PC happening on the right"?
It isn't as common as on the left, but cancellation from the right do happen. A short while ago actors from the Disney Star Wars trilogy were targeted for cancellation by right-wing mobs. They didn't outright lose their jobs, but they were forced to remove their social media accounts as a result of all the abuse they were receiving.
Firings however do happen when it comes to, for example, unionization. Try to be a union advocate in a sector that have few or no active unions, and legal protections of union ad
Ya, this has to be a bad joke.
Righty's are just as bad about clutching their fake ass pearls over their pet cares.
Turns out what's politically correct for the left wing isn't what's politically correct for the right wing.
No. His new Twitter feed barely even has any followers. His old Twitter feed was banned for breaching Twitter's ToS.
If you're a no-name in a company you can generally get away with your personal time not affecting the company image. If you're a big shot somebody you should realise that public relations and image is a part of your job. He fucked that part up and lost his job as a result.
Notice how I post with the username thegarbz, rather than my actual full name? I have a feeling if I go on some Naazi rampage my employer won't want to associate with me either.
> I have a feeling if I go on some Naazi rampage my employer won't want to associate with me either.
That's certainly true, but if you do that, there are people who may try to dox you and "thegarbz" won't help you speak freely. By comparison, when right wingers doxxed googlers that admitted to being, say, communist: (as reported by Wired) https://www.wired.com/story/in... [wired.com]
This "doxxing" was just literally listing their social media profiles, where they admitted to being communists. These innocent leftwinger
Now, they aren't actually after fasists- they are after EVERYONE WHO ISN'T THEM. They just had the most luck starting with extreme right wingers, then they moved on to the conspiracy theorists. Libertarians and "Trump supporters" are next, and they'll just go until no one effective can speak against them at all.
You forgot anti-vaxxers.
But fundamentally I agree: Freedom of speech is in practice being limited to an opinion corridor determined largely by big tech with support from the left in the USA. But it will also limit speech for other groups. I would think that the extreme left is next on the list since they are now a liability. But also soft censorship of people advocating alternative life style choices such as fringe religions, spiritualism, alternative diets and so on.
other people don't agree with my fringe views (Score:2, Insightful)
Help help I'm being oppressed!
No, all of us using TinkerPop are being oppressed (Score:4, Insightful)
Help help I'm being oppressed!
Hey moron, this wasn't some small whiner, but a co-founder and critical figure in the TinkerPop management team.
But thank God ASF corporate got involved, overrode the Apache Project Management Committee and fired him over some dank memes.
FFS, you worthless assholes who've never accomplished anything in your miserable lives must live for moments like this where you can take real visionaries like Marko and treat them like the crap you are.
Now everyone using TinkerPop is going to have to start asking hard ques
Re: (Score:1, Insightful)
If a corporation has rules for conduct, and you break them, why are you at all surprised.
I don't know about this project, or the person. But anytime someone whines about "woke" culture, you'll usually find that person engages in cyberbullying, trolling, libertarian, conservative, or otherwise wacky right-wing conspiracies.
All I can find connected to the guy is a twitter full of images while complaining about cancel culture.
Re:No, all of us using TinkerPop are being oppress (Score:5, Informative)
He didn't do any of this on company time or in any official capacity. His twitter feed barely even has any followers. This is a ridiculous level of PC bullshit.
Re: (Score:2)
He is currently the only source of information about why he was removed. He has plenty of reason to be dishonest about what happened. Why don't you wait for more information?
Re:No, all of us using TinkerPop are being oppress (Score:5, Informative)
He is currently the only source of information about why he was removed. He has plenty of reason to be dishonest about what happened. Why don't you wait for more information?
If you read TFA, an ASF board member resigned over it, seeming to corroborate his account.
The claim that Rodriguez published his tweets to the private@tinkerpop mailing list are untrue, insisted Hedhman, as he said is the claim that Rodriguez used the ASF resources to humiliate people.
There's still a lack of information, but that's another point of data from someone directly involved.
Re: (Score:2)
Thanks, I missed that in my skim of TFA.
Re:No, all of us using TinkerPop are being oppress (Score:4, Insightful)
He is currently the only source of information about why he was removed. He has plenty of reason to be dishonest about what happened. Why don't you wait for more information?
If you read TFA, an ASF board member resigned over it, seeming to corroborate his account.
Well, that can mean that they share opinions.
There is some irony in that he's up in arms about Woke culture and PC'ism. People who get fired from Google often claim of the opposite, because they are fired because they are "woke" - like the recent firing of Margaret Mitchell and Timnit Gebru.
These folks have played a very active part in their dismissal. And pretty impressive that they blame the opposite things.
If you are a leader, you are expected to act like one.
Re: (Score:2)
"Woke" people fired from Google tend to be fired for stuff that goes directly against employer's interest - leaking confidential internal info (including code), sabotaging projects, breaking NDAs, or faking evidence against other employees to have them fired.
They don't get fired for memes on Twitter.
Re: (Score:2)
"Woke" people fired from Google tend to be fired for stuff that goes directly against employer's interest - leaking confidential internal info (including code), sabotaging projects, breaking NDAs, or faking evidence against other employees to have them fired.
They don't get fired for memes on Twitter.
Let's use an example.
If you have a top person in your company who despite being very competent, goes on Twitter to post inflammatory shit, perhaps even calls for say, creating gas cambers for whoever his enemies were. You pick which group, because I merely show that left or right, it's similar. You apparently want it to apply only to the persecution of the right - okay, we'll work with your view.
Your attention is drawn to his posts, because some people don't believe in gassing people.
What are you goi
Re: (Score:2)
If you have a top person in your company who despite being very competent, goes on Twitter to post inflammatory shit, perhaps even calls for say, creating gas cambers for whoever his enemies were. (...) What are you going to do? Keep him on staff? Because you will then be associated with his postings as a supporter of them.
That very scenario happened at Disney. The fired "The Mandalorian" actress Gina Carano for her bad-taste right-wing tweets, including a final one of a meme comparing Republicans cancelled by Democrats to Jewish persecuted by N@azis (thanks, lameness filter!), but they didn't fire "The Mandalorian" actor Pedro Pascal for his bad-taste left-wing tweets, among which there's one of a meme asking for children of Trump supporters to be killed.
By your reasoning, Disney would want to be associated with neither QAno
Re: (Score:2)
If you have a top person in your company who despite being very competent, goes on Twitter to post inflammatory shit, perhaps even calls for say, creating gas cambers for whoever his enemies were. (...) What are you going to do? Keep him on staff? Because you will then be associated with his postings as a supporter of them.
>By your reasoning, Disney would want to be associated with neither QAnon conspiracy theorizing nor with apologies for mass murder, but they seem to be pretty fine with the later simply because it's from a mostly left-wing actor. Which begs the question: how extreme must left-wing tweets be for a company such as Disney to fire someone over them? If even the apology of mass murder isn't enough, I wonder whether such a line even exists.
By my rationale, you don't get to play whataboutism. If you worked for me and you posted far right or far left wing shit, your ass would be escorted out by armed guard. Do you understand? My company - my rules according to law.
In fact, why do you try to point me out as being a hypocrite, when I have nothing to do with Disney. It's their company, and in an at will world, their rules. At will is pretty much the law of the land, and if your employer does not like the color of your socks, they are completely j
Re: (Score:2)
why do you try to point me out as being a hypocrite
I didn't. I pointed Disney's case as a counterexample to what I perceived as a generalization in the sections of your post I quoted, according which a company wouldn't want to be associated with inflammatory remarks. Disney shows that companies do want to be, or at least doesn't mind being, associated with inflammatory remarks as long as those remarks are inflammatory in one direction, not the other.
if your employer does not like the color of your socks, they are completely justified and allowed by law to fire you
True. Too bad all these companies have lobbied governments all around to the point neither you nor I are actu
Re: (Score:2)
why do you try to point me out as being a hypocrite
I didn't. I pointed Disney's case as a counterexample to what I perceived as a generalization in the sections of your post I quoted,
Yeah, but you are assuming that since this guy was right wing, I was supporting left wing asshattery. I was not. That Disney may have not acted upon the Mandalorian stars actions, doesn''t mean I support him.
Re: (Score:2)
You "Whatabout"ed the TinkerPop case with your Google counter-example and a fictional case to try and case the TinkerPop example into more of a business setting. The followup demonstrated your example in fact played out in real life, but in a demonstrably one-sided, double-standard-ish way.
All of which is to illustrate that in real life, your Google & what-if examples are different in that they are much rarer and it involved an employee's actions that were at least in part directly work related (versu
Re: (Score:2)
You "Whatabout"ed the TinkerPop case with your Google counter-example and a fictional case to try and case the TinkerPop example into more of a business setting. The followup demonstrated your example in fact played out in real life, but in a demonstrably one-sided, double-standard-ish way.
All of which is to illustrate that in real life, your Google & what-if examples are different in that they are much rarer and it involved an employee's actions that were at least in part directly work related (versus punishing a volunteer by kicking him out of his project for non-work related matters).
"What if" is not "whataboutism", muchacho.
What if is asking if another situation is applicable.
Whataboutism is trying to make a person look like a hypocrite by an example of an inconsistency. It's like say, country A claims that country B did something bad, so country B says Country A has done the same bad thing. It's a dopey argument, because it ends up claiming to support the supposed hypocrite is guilty of nothing, because the person playing whataboutism is exonerating the supposed hypocrite country
Re: (Score:2)
Well, that can mean that they share opinions.
They clearly do, if you read the article. It doesn't mean they're lying about his stupid tweets staying on his personal account.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, that can mean that they share opinions.
They clearly do, if you read the article. It doesn't mean they're lying about his stupid tweets staying on his personal account.
Let's say that you own a company, or are a majority shareholder.
Do you have expectations of say, the Chief Executive Officer?
Tell me which actions you might find a problem:
Having an onlyfans page where he or she engages in sexual activity for people
Posting on parler where he or she encourages armed rebellion.
Posts chibi Hentai
Posts on facebook or twitter that they believe that trans and gay people or QAnon members should be euthanized or otherwise deprived of life.
Now we get into some real life
Re: (Score:2)
He is currently the only source of information about why he was removed. He has plenty of reason to be dishonest about what happened. Why don't you wait for more information?
This is a little like the Ethics manager at Google being canned for performing unethical practices.
Gather round kids, and take some telling. As an olde farte, I've seen my share of people being fired. To a person, they have a litany of excuses as to why, and I've never heard one exclaim that it was their fault.
When in fact, they all had an integral part in their dismissal.
Re: (Score:0, Insightful)
PC happens on the right as well as the left. Time to get used to the modern society where no one approves of anything if it doesn't fit into their tight dogma.
Re: (Score:2)
Can you provide some examples of "PC happening on the right"? Or whatever you view the opposite of this to really be. The only times I've seen leftists censored is when they post absolutely horrendous racism or call explicitly for violence, and it's usually not anyone important.
Re: (Score:2)
So yeah, plenty of PC on the right, for their own version of political correctness.
Re: (Score:2)
> Comic books. Rock music.
You're correct, but there's a few differences. In the case of comic books, nobody fired people for holding leftwing views- instead we saw government enforced censorship. In the case of rock music, we DEFINITELY didn't see people getting fired for holding leftwing views- if anything, corporations jumping on that bandwagon gave a massive credibility boost to random rockers. And in both cases, we see stuff that stopped happening MOSTLY around fifty years ago.
> McCarthyism
Much
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Not really. There aren't a lot of Moms who have their husbands take X-rated pictures and videos of themselves and sell them to the tune of $1,800,000 a year. That's definitely going to make people sit up and take notice, especially if word of such a "family business" gets out into a school setting with children involved. Definitely will ruffle some feathers, to be sure.
But it's nothing like the tidal waves of PC we're all being flooded with fro
Re: (Score:2)
There aren't a lot of Moms who have their husbands take X-rated pictures
It was an example, genius.
especially if word of such a "family business" gets out into a school setting with children involved.
Did you even read the story? No children were involved. The only reason it "got out" were the parents reporting it. It wouldn't have gotten out otherwise, so those parents were the ones getting it out into a school setting with children involved.
But it's nothing like the tidal waves of PC we're all being flooded with from the left. Nothing.
I gave examples in my other reply, but sure, pretend they don't exist.
Re: (Score:2)
> Or how about this?
I'm a real big fan of that second picture, that bondagemilf thing she's got going is pretty great.
On topic though, this counts, but you have to admit it's at technicality. She hasn't lost her livelihood (in fact I bet this article is amazing promotion), and presumably had her kids kicked out of some super conservative private school that she selected for its religious values. I don't understand exactly why they would take their anger at her sexy pictures out on her kids, but I do un
Re: (Score:2)
Can you provide some examples of "PC happening on the right"?
It isn't as common as on the left, but cancellation from the right do happen. A short while ago actors from the Disney Star Wars trilogy were targeted for cancellation by right-wing mobs. They didn't outright lose their jobs, but they were forced to remove their social media accounts as a result of all the abuse they were receiving.
Firings however do happen when it comes to, for example, unionization. Try to be a union advocate in a sector that have few or no active unions, and legal protections of union ad
Re: (Score:2)
Righty's are just as bad about clutching their fake ass pearls over their pet cares.
Turns out what's politically correct for the left wing isn't what's politically correct for the right wing.
Re:No, all of us using TinkerPop are being oppress (Score:5, Insightful)
His twitter feed barely even has any followers.
No. His new Twitter feed barely even has any followers. His old Twitter feed was banned for breaching Twitter's ToS.
If you're a no-name in a company you can generally get away with your personal time not affecting the company image. If you're a big shot somebody you should realise that public relations and image is a part of your job. He fucked that part up and lost his job as a result.
Notice how I post with the username thegarbz, rather than my actual full name? I have a feeling if I go on some Naazi rampage my employer won't want to associate with me either.
Re: (Score:0)
> I have a feeling if I go on some Naazi rampage my employer won't want to associate with me either.
That's certainly true, but if you do that, there are people who may try to dox you and "thegarbz" won't help you speak freely.
By comparison, when right wingers doxxed googlers that admitted to being, say, communist:
(as reported by Wired)
https://www.wired.com/story/in... [wired.com]
This "doxxing" was just literally listing their social media profiles, where they admitted to being communists. These innocent leftwinger
Re: (Score:2)
Now, they aren't actually after fasists- they are after EVERYONE WHO ISN'T THEM. They just had the most luck starting with extreme right wingers, then they moved on to the conspiracy theorists. Libertarians and "Trump supporters" are next, and they'll just go until no one effective can speak against them at all.
You forgot anti-vaxxers.
But fundamentally I agree: Freedom of speech is in practice being limited to an opinion corridor determined largely by big tech with support from the left in the USA. But it will also limit speech for other groups. I would think that the extreme left is next on the list since they are now a liability. But also soft censorship of people advocating alternative life style choices such as fringe religions, spiritualism, alternative diets and so on.
But there will of course be a backlash.
Re: (Score:0)
Well, I'll just leave it to YOU to IMAGINE your own STRAWMEN.