Actually, it isnt very diverse. Hence why they are trying actually change that, especially among its leadership. At least that is their public stance who knows what it will be in practice.
The main culprit was an Iranian-American. The Cosby Suite was in fact from a “Diverse” team in the sense you use “Diverse”.
Heck, if we really wanted Diversity in California, you’d need to hire a few Republicans probably. That would actually bring some form of actual diversity to the teams.
5 Likes
The main culprit was a guy. Several males to be precise.
I could honestly give a f less about diversity. I care about people being hired for jobs because of their qualifications. Not just to meet some imaginary social standard to virtue signal.
2 Likes
So “all men” is your argument. Gotcha. Basically, you’re a huge sexist.
5 Likes
Nope, in fact i never said that because if you havent notice I am guy as well. However certain “frat culture” has no place in a work environment. And right now said frat culture might not exist in a more diverse work invironment.
1 Like
Ummm, scroll up, I was in the military.
P.S. the United States Marine Corps agrees with me in terms of diversity strengthening a team’s problem solving capability and efficiency.
What does your poor leadership have to do with diversity?
Oh…I guess nothing. Well, sorry you aren’t good at getting your employees to work together a guess, let’s try to get back on topic though.
That doesn’t change you have sexist attitudes towards men.
Tell the women at my work place.
3 Likes
allowing alcohol in the workplace was a stupid idea anyway. I wonder how much of it was due to liquid courage.
actually i did see a woman get fired for just that. she wanted a dude 20 years younger than her… and was VERY descriptive. So yes they fired… but less often because most dudes will brush it off or be flattered by it.
1 Like
So what the women at your work are harrassing guys? Probably should tell that to your HR.
1 Like
Ah yes that bastion of critical thought that is the military.
“Follow orders soldier” leads to what you observed, not lack of diversity.
The fact that non-diverse teams don’t agree on a solution means non diverse teams don’t in fact have 1 perspective and 1 way to solve problems like you claimed.
Exactly. Your statement was both sexist and racist.
5 Likes
TLDR: When companies pursue statistical diversification, it leads to discrimination against the majority demographic of available workers in the workforce.
Imagine a population of 10,000. Imagine that 90% of that population is “group A” (the majority), and the other 10% of that population is split between 10 different minority groups (groups B through K).
Now imagine a company looking to hire 99 employees from that population of 10,000. They’re aiming for a “perfectly diverse company”, so they want an equal number of employees from each group. What they end up with is:
- 9 employees from “Group A” - representing 0.001% of Group A’s population
- 9 employees from “Group B” - representing 9% of Group B’s population
- 9 employees from “Group C” - representing 9% of Group C’s population
- 9 employees from “Group D” - representing 9% of Group D’s population
- 9 employees from “Group E” - representing 9% of Group E’s population
- 9 employees from “Group F” - representing 9% of Group F’s population
- 9 employees from “Group G” - representing 9% of Group G’s population
- 9 employees from “Group H” - representing 9% of Group H’s population
- 9 employees from “Group I” - representing 9% of Group I’s population
- 9 employees from “Group J” - representing 9% of Group J’s population
- 9 employees from “Group K” - representing 9% of Group K’s population
In this case, “Group A” has to be artificially discriminated against in order for the company to achieve “statistically perfect diversity”.
Let’s instead look at another example where we try to “minimize” discrimination against the major population.
- 89 employees from “Group A” - representing roughly 0.01% of Group A’s population
- 1 employee from “Group B” - representing 1% of Group B’s population
- 1 employee from “Group C” - representing 1% of Group C’s population
- 1 employee from “Group D” - representing 1% of Group D’s population
- 1 employee from “Group E” - representing 1% of Group E’s population
- 1 employee from “Group F” - representing 1% of Group F’s population
- 1 employee from “Group G” - representing 1% of Group G’s population
- 1 employee from “Group H” - representing 1% of Group H’s population
- 1 employee from “Group I” - representing 1% of Group I’s population
- 1 employee from “Group J” - representing 1% of Group J’s population
- 1 employee from “Group K” - representing 1% of Group K’s population
Trying to hire based off of some demographic instead of job qualifications and work ethics (as many have listed in this thread) is just a poor attempt at virtue signaling. A worker does not have to be in a minority in order to act professionally toward another human being.
5 Likes
We can deal with it just fine. They act like Sorority sisters.
AKA : it’s not a “Men” problem as you posit. It’s a Individual problem with some Individuals.
Diversity doesn’t magically fix personal behaviors.
3 Likes
People have this idealized image in their head where everyone should be hired based on merit alone.
I agree.
The problem is that sometimes this does not always happen. And its become a big enough issue that some people decided to come together and have diversity quotas as a means to combat against a subconcous bias or whatever you want to call it.
Is this a perfect system? nope.
But in an increasingly modernized industry, it might be better to have some kind of safety net to specifically prevent against underrepresentation.
Because, at least in this company, the old way of doing things didn’t work out so well.
1 Like
Most sorority sisters are not in the habit of harrassing males/drinking at work. And that is the “frat culture” that was at Blizzard.
It’s the same frat culture yes.
Again, you’re confusing some people at Blizzard with the whole of everyone at Blizzard, and you’re making this about their immutable characteristics rather than their crappy personalities.
AKA : you’re not solving anything and your view is sexist and racist as heck.
Muting this thread, it will not lead to anything productive.
2 Likes
I don’t invite players based on their race/class in M+ I base it on their performance record.
Shouldn’t real life be the same?
5 Likes
Here’s a question, how many women actually apply to Blizzard? How many men? How many PoC? How many Trans?
Chances are that an absolute super majority of applicants… are men. So, it stands to reason that with a larger pool of applicants you will find the most qualified people. This has nothing to do with your sexual proclivity, skin color, or what your spirit animal is, what matters are the numbers.
If Blizzard get inundated with applicants of a certain gender or background, why should they be punished if they draw from that pool?
1 Like
Ummm yeah we have the best military in the world, and we didn’t have to worry about any of the political BS. Our one and only goal was mission accomplishment, and diversity was determined to be beneficial to this end.
Lol no it doesn’t. Even if your non-diverse teams don’t agree, the probability that their solutions share more in common with one another when compared to a more diverse team is high. Diversity still wins.
I don’t really care.
You people are far too invested in your politics on both sides of the aisle and it turns you into idiot zombies.
I agree that often enough companies like Blizzard can make diversity hires purely for the sake of P.R. and saving face and it’s super cringe and I hate it and they aren’t doing it for the right reasons so I don’t trust that the candidate was even slightly qualified for the job. There are absolutely situations where diversity hires can hurt a company because they aren’t doing it for the right reasons and they just want to check a box so they can say they aren’t racist.
All I’m saying is that if you remove all the politics, you remove all the BS nonsense, at the most basic level, all other factors being equal, having diversity is better than not having diversity.
Therefore, from a purely capitalist point of view, it is worth sacrificing some amount of qualification in exchange for some amount of diversity. What amount that is? That’s up to each individual company to determine when making their hires, but when I see people posting “you should ONLY hire based purely on merit” I have to point out that this isn’t necessarily true.
1 Like
It was a big enough cultural trait of Blizzard that they are now being sued for it. That tells me it is a bigger problem that you are trying to portray.
2 Likes