James Damore just filed a class action lawsuit against Google

[TerranceL]

Still crying about So's Law I see.

What you mean that rule you made up because just saying "strawman" was too hard?

Allow me to paraphrase.

USincognito, I posted with Nathan Poe. I knew Nathan Poe. Nathan Poe was a friend of mine. USincognito, you're no Nathan Poe.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Ugh, this tactic is so tiresome and insipid. It's especially ironic given that you didn't think I was a white man - That's increasingly the way they see it. - implying I'm not one of "they".

I'll fully admit I didn't assume one way or the other...I try not to make racial statements about people posting.

Well, "Ana", I am one of "they" and white men, in America are not oppressed. Any of us who "sees it that way" is just looking to be aggrieved.

Oooh la la...SO, you speak for the entire race, or you're just making extremely broad racial statements because you're a member of that race?

Still crying about So's Law I see.

I never heard of it either...and it's only a strawman if it changes the subject to something else, which I didn't. SO...its a pretty stupid law. Who is this "So"?

I'm just asking how you know that white men aren't ever oppressed.

 

[USincognito]

edit - I'm doing being flamed, trolled and oppressed.

 

[USincognito]

edit - I'm doing being flamed, trolled and oppressed.

 

[Rion]

Very interesting.

The misrepresentation of James Damore | The Knife Media

We quantified these distortions: CNN, The New York Times and The Washington Post received overall integrity ratings of 12 percent, 17 percent and 20 percent, respectively (lower scores mean less objectivity). On the other hand, we found Damore’s memo used more nuanced arguments and varied perspectives, and it received a rating of 74 percent.

The Knife Media, btw, is an outside group which cuts through the bullsqueeze and lays out how much spin each source is putting into any given piece, and ranks them... and they don't play favorites. Breitbart, Fox, NYT, CNN, they all get put under the microscope.

 

[jardiniere]

I have to spend 15 dollars to read their analysis numbers, rather than just their synopsis? Not impressive. I do happen to agree with them that the media coverage was quite poor, but so was Damore's paper-I would have liked to have seen their analysis on that because I saw a lot of what I considered cherry-picking data in Damore's work to support his contention that it wasn't all sexism that drives the differential gender gap at Google.

Also, one has to consider what was the overarching point of Damore's paper was to begin with-what was the goal?

And why did he go outside the company rather than following channels? That may have been the fault of Google, if they didn't have a method for making employee's opinions known. But I don't know that. Though once the paper was outside the company, all it could do was damage the company, and thus his firing was quite reasonable in my opinion, because it did damage Google. You don't get to do that as an employee, generally speaking.

Did like hearing about this website, it really helps people to show how to analyze news articles, not something that most people are adept at.

 

[MoonlessNight]

At some point some folks decided that bleating the name of a logical fallacy was all they needed to do as if somehow posting, "AD-HOMINEM" or "Strawman!" was a smack down for an argument. Pointing out someone has used a logical fallacy doesn't automatically make you right when you don't follow it up with anything.

It means you can identify logical fallacies.

Pseudo-dialectic is a hell of a drug.