Ex-Google Recruiter Fired For Resisting Racist Hiring Tactics

arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2018/03/ex-google-recruiter-i-was-fired-because-i-resisted-illegal-diversity-efforts/

>A former YouTube employee has sued Google—the video site’s parent company—alleging that he was wrongfully fired after he complained against hiring practices that were discriminatory against white and Asian men.
>From the lawsuit:
>In April of 2017, Google’s Technology Staffing Management team was instructed by Alogna to immediately cancel all Level 3 (0-5 years experience) software engineering interviews with every single applicant who was not either female, Black, or Hispanic and to purge entirely any applications by non-diverse employees from the hiring pipeline. Plaintiff refused to comply with this request.

>Google management literally said "throw out applications from all white and Asian men
Holy shit. I hope Google gets fucking roasted for this but the fact that the lawsuit is in California is a bad omen. Their courts will probably rule that it's perfectly justified because fuck men, especially whites and Asians.

Other urls found in this thread:

reddit.com/r/cscareerquestions/comments/81enmx/exgoogle_recruiter_i_was_fired_because_i_resisted/
reddit.com/r/NOWTTYG/
youtube.com/watch?v=BVz2lHODQvs#t=4s
nytimes.com/2012/12/21/nyregion/cuomo-says-he-will-outline-gun-measures-next-month.html
youtube.com/watch?v=1_LaBJvI0BI
crimeresearch.org/2013/12/murder-and-homicide-rates-before-and-after-gun-bans/
wnd.com/2004/12/28253/
factcheck.org/2015/10/gun-laws-deaths-and-crimes/
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

And here's a Reddit thread filled with tons professional tech recruiters saying that they are forced to do the same thing - throw out or heavily degrade applications from white and Asian men, because of "diversity".

reddit.com/r/cscareerquestions/comments/81enmx/exgoogle_recruiter_i_was_fired_because_i_resisted/

This is now a rage thread

>being surprised by this in the current year
Civil war is approaching quickly, and these shitlibs are going to get a boot up their asses.

gay dude here
i never mentioned it before in my resume because it has literally no bearing on how i do my job but i didn't realize it could get me a diversity hire
what are my chances if i actually mention it somewhere

No wonder they want to ban guns. I would too if I were trying to start a race war.

If I were gay id milk it for all it was worth. Try to become apart of some gay mens society or outreach group and put that on your resume.

but other gay people are so tacky and annoying
it's a goddamn miracle i got married in the first place

Ya, i dont have a problem with gay people, just the obnoxious flaming faggots.

>but other gay people are so tacky and annoying
A lot of white people and men are self-hating retards, but I still put up with them for the sake of making more money.

Just suck up and deal with the literal faggots so you can bring home more money and fuck off out of wage cuckery sooner.

>Ya, i dont have a problem with gay people, just the obnoxious flaming faggots.

The left wants war. When the propose gun bans, they don't want to collect them from violent black thugs in Detroit or Chicago that own them illegally. They want to strip the white working class of their legally obtained firearms so that they can't fight back. By UN standards, whites in the US are already facing ethnocide. The gun bans are being pushed so that we can't resist a full blown genocide. This is what the left has in store for white America. And yes, many of these people are jews, just as Sup Forums so often points out.

If they try to take the guns, I'll fight them. The founding fathers created the second amendment so that we would be able to use brute force and raw violence against anyone who tries to oppress us. Whatever happens next is going to be self defense. The left wanted this, and now they're really going to get it.

I use the word faggot in the sense of anyone that's loud and stupid for the purpose of attracting attention.

Are you under the impression that all gay people are raging faggots?

Let me ask you this, you probable soyboy-from-reddit.

What the fuck was the point of your comment? Were you trying to make the fag "feel more comfortable" here? Were you trying to explain how good of a person you are for """"not having a problem"""" with gay people?

The dude sucks dicks. Literally. Why did you feel the need to tell him that you're 100% a-okay with that? Who the fuck cares? What's wrong with you?

Fuck you.

i don't like oral actual

Well that's cus you're gay

>Are you under the impression that all gay people are raging faggots?
Most of them are pretty calm, actually.

Of course.

I replied because he commented on my post you dumbass. I don't care about him or whatever he does with his dick. The fact that you wrote a 2 paragraph rage to a statement that wasn't directed at you says alot about you.

so anyway should i just leave it at a casual mention of my husband in my cover letter or should i go full HELLO I AM user, THE GAY MAN

you should kys so there are no more diverse people

hey man i just really want the job

>calls someone "soyboy-from-reddit
>using reddit spacing
this is either a serious lack of self-awareness, or a not-half-bad attempt at b8

>asian men are also excluded now because they're too good at what they do
you can't make this shit up.
Do you think Google specified what asian was?
I bet they didn't mean Middle-eastern or Indian.

whoops I forgot this:
>"

Hold up fagtard, let's break this down.

DickMonger says:
>but other gay people are so tacky and annoying
>it's a goddamn miracle i got married in the first place

Indicating he doesn't want to deal with gay people because they're annoying faggots. Totally understandable. Most people are complete faggots and I wouldn't want to hang around them either.

You (redditard) reply:
>Ya, i dont have a problem with gay people, just the obnoxious flaming faggots.

1) Why did you feel the need to say "I don't have a problem with gay people"? Where was it ever implied that you do?
2) What the FUCK does that have to do with his post? Cockmongler doesn't like hanging around queers, and your response is "well *I'm* okay with gay people, it's just the obnoxious ones I don't like".

Are you worried that someone will think you're homophobic? Are you worried about offending him? Dude's had dicks in his butt, he can handle it. Or are you just wanting to virtue signal how progressive you are?

>Formatting your posts so they're easy to read means you're from le reddit
Since fucking when has Sup Forums been known to have awful formatting? Nobody likes that here. Literally nobody.

If you really don't want to get involved with any gay outreach stuff, casual mentioning of your husband in the cover letter is the least tacky way to do it. It is a hard aspect to bring up without being awkward.

>just offer to suck the recruiter's dick

No one care about gays anymore.
Even LGBT hates you.

Put transgender or genderfuild on there and you'll have guaranteed hires.

Of course, you'll also be perpetuating this new-age bullshit, but that's your choice.

The first part of the sentence adds context to the second. Its there for idoits like you that think. "Oh he said the word faggot. I bet he hates all gay people too just like me. Lets make this a gay hate parade."

It was in response to his question of asking wether he should be flaming gay on his resume or just normal gay. I was stating my opinion as a form of advice for him.

Go back to Sup Forums

Penis in tact?
Resume in the trash.

it's the reddit mentality of virtue signalling, don't think about it too much

No one is trying to take your guns, fuckstain

Fuck off with your virtue signaling you lowlife

It doesn't really matter. When the whites get pushed out of silicon valley they'll take their skills and move them somewhere else. Companies fall pretty quickly if their internals are made of garbage.

What the fuck is virtue signalling?? Translate that to non-reddit speak.

>Its there for idoits like you that think. "Oh he said the word faggot. I bet he hates all gay people too just like me. Lets make this a gay hate parade."
Wait just a minute there fuckface, at no point did I say anything that even implies I hate gays. If simply "not saying he loves gay people" automatically means "he hates gays" in your mind, then fuck you.

>I was stating my opinion as a form of advice for him.
Oh. That wasn't clear.

this can get much more awkward later down the line if you date a coworker.

Let me ask you this, what are you babbling about?

Virtue signaling is when you exclaim how progressive/good of a person/nice/generous/whatever positive quality you are, despite it either not really being true or being totally irrelevant to the discussion. It's when you "signal how virtuous" you are. Things like

>"I don't have a problem with gay people at all"
despite having nothing to do with the discussion

>posting a video on youtube or instagram of you giving money to a homeless person
If you were actually generous, you wouldn't upload a fucking video to get likes and comments and people saying how great of a person you are. You'd just do it.

Come on now

Here's an entire reddit board dedicated to news stories and official statements from people who do, in fact, want to take your guns.

reddit.com/r/NOWTTYG/

So fuck off, shill.

Tech companies want people who won't leave when their products reach maturity. White/Asian men are competent and will leave and SHOULD so that their brains can be used elsewhere (you don't hear about Boston Dynamics pushing for diversity).

Google, YouTube, Twitter... All companies that are established and just need people to grease the wheels. Hire people that can code but have a victim complex and are non-functional socially. Create a bubble / safe space for them and they are your slave.

It's the perfect plan.

I originally skimmed past thing assuming it's related to Damoore but then I noticed it said "recruiter" not programmer.

I figured Google would of counted their blessings and reverted some areas to prevent legal action.

It appears they are just doubling down though...
I suppose they do have the highest majority of lefties in the country in SV.
They just have a reinforcing circlejerk that prevents them from being unbiased.

Techically I did say that I disliked gays, but only certian types of gays. Without a contradictory statement it could be contrived in a way that makes it sound like i dislike all homosexuals, which is false.

The first part of the statement I made ads more information so that I can be understood correctly. I couldn't care less wether people think I like gays or not. However, i felt it nessasary to say that instead of just responding with: "Ya, I hate faggots."

>banning sales is the same thing as going into people's homes and taking their property without consent

GOP has the Presidency and both houses of congress and they still think they've victims. They are professional victims, just as bad as the SJWs they hate so much. Fuck em all.

>However, i felt it nessasary to say that instead of just responding with: "Ya, I hate faggots."
That's fair.

Look at this picture. Are you fucking retarded?

>We want to stop people from getting guns
>This is not the same as stopping people from getting guns!

it is far from the mainstream opinion of the left. that kind of nonsensical bullshit is to be expected from someone like that retard

>"getting" is the same thing as "having"!

And the people who do want to entirely disarm the American public hide behind moderates who just want "sensible" gun control.

Here's one congresswoman saying "assault weapon bans are just the beginning": youtube.com/watch?v=BVz2lHODQvs#t=4s

Here's the governor of New York: "Confiscation could be an option. Mandatory sale to the state could be an option."
nytimes.com/2012/12/21/nyregion/cuomo-says-he-will-outline-gun-measures-next-month.html

The lovely Diane Feinstein talking about guns: "If I could have banned them all, I would have." youtube.com/watch?v=1_LaBJvI0BI

Even if *you* don't support a total gun ban, the people that you support for "common sense" gun control, do.

Wouldn't mandatory gun safes be a good solution? It would allow gun owners to have guns and at the same time keep them out of the hands of children. At least now we have someone to blame if a kid got their hands on their parents rifle.

I'm not the user you're replying to, but you have to be a special type of stupid to somehow think you can have something without getting it. But guessing you're a dumbass authoritarian anyway, it doesn't surprise me you're going to continue arguing for your oppression with semantics.

One day Comrade, one day.

what

people who don't own gun are the same as those who don't own bitcoin. you are spiritually bankrupt and the simulation will forget you and yours.

I wonder, if you could solve the Riemann hypothesis but were a "white or Asian male", would they still reject you?

So you want the government to be your Big Brother now to protect you from yourself? Let's also force parents to put away their kitchen knives by gun point, and arrest parents that don't put mandatory state helmets on their children.

You can have something without getting it tho...?
>Ex
I have a fork. I can use this fork whenever I want. I don't have to go to the store to get another fork if I want to use it?

...

This may be the beginning of the happening.
>lawsuit reaches Supreme Court
>Supreme Court bans affirmative action forever
>Jews writhing on the streets in agony
>nigger and spic employment rates suddenly cut in half
>hey wait a minute
>1488+1776=2019

>Google vows to defend lawsuit, says it hires “candidates based on their merit.”
Well, that's social justice for you. In their view, merit IS racial identity.

Really?

Alot of government laws are there to protect you from youself. That's why we have building codes, regulated prescriptions, etc.

>lockup kitchen knives
A sharp metal wedge and a device that can shoot metal slugs at high velocity have very different uses and dangers. You don't use handguns to cut your sandwhiches do you?

>arrest parents helmets
These examples are a bit dramatic don't you think?

You're an idiot, a gun grabbing Communist, and probably female. Tits or GTFO.

>Wouldn't mandatory gun safes be a good solution?
In theory yes, in practice no. Gun control has never reduced violent crime nor murder.

Here are some sources:
>crimeresearch.org/2013/12/murder-and-homicide-rates-before-and-after-gun-bans/
>wnd.com/2004/12/28253/
>factcheck.org/2015/10/gun-laws-deaths-and-crimes/

And quite a few more studies. Gun control just doesn't affect overall crime rates.

Great strawman lol

Kill yourself

>In April of 2017, Google’s Technology Staffing Management team was instructed by Alogna to immediately cancel all Level 3 (0-5 years experience) software engineering interviews with every single applicant who was not either female, Black, or Hispanic and to purge entirely any applications by non-diverse employees from the hiring pipeline. Plaintiff refused to comply with this request.

Internet armchair lawyer here. I think that this suit has merit because this was not just merely a matter of "score minority candidates x more points higher" or "give a second look to minority candidates" but "entirely purge all candidates of a certain race regardless of their other qualifications".

If you stopped counting suicides as gun deaths and physically removed all the blacks and hispanics from the country, gun crime in the US would be a rounding error. Third world people beget third world problems. The ONLY reason to go after legal gun owners knowing all this is to disarm them in preparation for tyranny.

SHALL
NOT
BE
INFRINGED

Namecalling, how astute of you.

While I agree it wouldn't change violent homicides, it would offer a comprimise and possibly help prevent school shootings.

It doesnt have to be a safe. Just some kind of "gun safety device". I don't think I'd even consider it "gun control".

Race aside, gang crime accounts for somewhere around 80% of all violent crime in the US, and 2/3 of gun deaths are suicides. That leaves about 8000 murders with guns, and that includes justified police shootings and self defense. 8000 deaths in a country of almost 330,000,000 people is well under 1% of all deaths, period.

>But maybe we can prevent those suicides if we take away guns
Would it not be a better idea to spend all those resources on helping people not want to fucking kill themselves? Rather than just taking away their tools and saying "lol get fucked, now you have to continue being alive".

Everyone agrees that we have an obesity problem in the US, and *nobody* is suggesting that banning fast food is the answer. Everyone agrees that the proper way to handle it is to educate people in diet and exercise so they can get healthy, not take away their tools for getting fat. Why is it different for guns?

you seems to be looking for comforting words, and that's about it.

That's why I suspect the poster is a dumb female. The arguing style is all wrong for a man.

Well yes, it would appeal to the left, while at the same time not comprimise gun ownership. Seem like a win-win.

Arguing that because someone dissagrees with you they must be female, and therefor dumb.

Your logic is rather flawed.

post your reaction whiteys end up unemployable and with massive debt

>64964409
>See how she recoils. "I've been found out!"

You mean except for all the Jews in Congress, and the governments of New York, California, New Jersey, Hawaii, Maryland, and a number of other states. Except for the huge lobbying campaign Everytown, USA funded by Michael Bloomberg? Except for that time Obama and Holder sent guns to Mexican cartels so they would kill people with them and it would precipitate a general ban on civilian ownership of firearms? Except for them, right?

Instead of trying to argue that im female why don't you try to argue that my statement is incorrect? You're avoiding the issue. It's almost like you don't know what you're talking about.

user I 100% understand what you're after with this, but I just don't think that any kind of gun control will stop school shootings. Most guns used for murder are obtained illegally to begin with, anyway.

More important than all that though, is that mass shootings are a tiny, *tiny* fraction of all murders, let alone all deaths. Around 500 per year, which is something like 2% of murders. I don't think we should be passing legislation that affects (literally) over a hundred million people in response to something that amounts to a rounding error in the country's death rate.

That said, IT IS A GOOD IDEA FOR PEOPLE TO USE GUN SAFES, *especially* if you have kids. Every single responsible gun owner will agree with this. None of them want their kid or anyone else's kid to accidentally shoot themselves or take their dad's gun to school. I just don't think legislation is the right way to go about that - like dealing with obesity, which kills literally orders of magnitude more people than guns, we should educate and train people, not force them by law to stop having McFlurrys every day.

The problem is that it's that tiny fraction that gets all the attention. And that attention can ruin it for those other 100 million people.

It's only the school shootings most people really care about. If you attempt to fix that then the public will be pleased instead of wanting to take away all guns.

Your """arguments""" are pointless because the fact of the matter is that there are more guns than people in the US, and we'll fucking shoot you if you try to confiscate them.

Where did i say anything about confiscating them? I was arguing for gun safes? You really are just baiting.

Good thing for you SJWs that gun laws in CA are strict, eh?

Fuck off lobbyist.

>Burgers so dumb that they don't understand that guns don't kill people
Burger education, am I r8 gays :-D

>It's only the school shootings most people really care about. If you attempt to fix that then the public will be pleased instead of wanting to take away all guns.
It just sucks because gun rights have already been whittled away, slowly but surely, starting in the 1930s. But unfortunately I think you're right. Some kind of feel-good legislation that doesn't actually do anything might need to be passed just to get the unthinking masses placated again.

It is a really sad state of affairs, isn't it? The people who want to take away guns the most, also know the least about them.

So it's official that Asians are white?

Just claim that your mother is Jewish.

I do get tempted on occasion to tick bisexual because despite being in a relationship with the same woman for 10 years how are they going to prove that I don't also find men attractive?

...

Yes, without any of the benefits. Welcome

>burglars breaking into your home
>safe is in the other room
>get up and run to the safe
>screw up the combination the first time
>burglar finds you and bashes your head in

We need more gun control so we can be safe like Brazil where guns are banned.

Does anyone even know a white guy hired at a top company?

I don't know why you would want to stop Google from hiring every sjw and shit coder in Cali. The sooner they implode the better. I want Google to be 99% black and female.

>No one care about gays anymore.
I don't know about that. Two years ago, I applied for a Goldman Sachs internship, and the application asked about my sexual orientation.

My father (who had made me apply, even though I wasn't interested) remarked "Hey! Aren't they not allowed to ask that?" when he saw it.

not him, but it seems as though you're engaging in your own form of virtue signalling here. Telling people here that you hate fags, niggers and jews is the same thing as people saying "oh i'm sooo progressive, I let somali immigrants give aids to my wife and children, and he even let me watch" on reddit. It's kind of already implied, tryhard.

And how is Gavin and the group he claims to speak for going to do that without owning guns himself, I wonder? Handing out vegan quiche and singing kum-ba-yah isn't going to work, I suspect.

i only hire oiled up nubians