that’s not what it says
it was written as an acceptable outcome
i think you should hire the best qualified humans lol for each position… what happened to people this is crazy talk
5 Likes
What are you referring to specifically?
And “simply redistributing opportunity from the bourgeoisie to the proletariet” has never worked out well in mankind’s history.
7 Likes
Name one time where a minority group got fair and equal treatment without it being driven by a law or court decision.
Laughs in gay marriage, women’s suffrage, and civil rights.
I love seeing bobby kotick toot his own horn too. boasting is my favorite form of game development. 
Oh, to be clear, I’m not supporting just employers getting to ask your orientation, gender, or race and then get to make decisions based on that…
I’m saying no one should have to disclose that, and employers shouldn’t ask for it in the first place as to not be judged on those characteristics for the purposes of hiring, positively or negatively.
Funny enough, the phrase that comes to mind in regards to this entire subject is,
"Irish need not apply"
Any iteration of this sentiment is, regardless of your politics, unacceptable in my submission.
2 Likes
Good, now let’s see if the new CEO will listen to reason and give us player housing.
K… what’s his stock at? Bezos also only takes a salary of a similar size… He’s still worth billions of dollars via stocks in Amazon…
I’m all for more women getting into the industry… but… this sounds like quotas… Want to educate employers and hiring staff about internal biases and keep people mindful of their decisions? Fair enough. That doesn’t change the fact that you should be hiring the best people for the job. Quota’s run directly counter to that stance.
3 Likes
Its smells foul to me. Basically they are judge jury and executioner now. One false complaint and you get fired. 50 50 is a waste. American dream work hard not be rewarded to fill a quota.
Right? This is the same energy as Trump not taking the White House salary. A gesture and nothing more, completely meaningless.
Again, as I said way earlier in the thread. The zero tolerance policy is not a ‘someone claims you did something and you’re fired’ type of affair. There will be an investigation. If the investigation proves that you did harass someone, or you retaliated against someone who reported harassment, then you’re fired.
This is actually a fairly standard policy across most companies. They take a zero tolerance approach to harassment. Doesn’t mean they fire people on the spot without investigation.
2 Likes
Gay marriage - Gay people asking for the same rights as straight people.
Women’s Suffrage - Women asking for the same rights as men.
Civil rights - Blacks asking for the same rights as whites.
This conversation: Please hire women and non-binary preferentially over men to promote equity. (yes you are asking for that if you’re asking for gender to be taken into account to determine whether to hire or not)
The first three were about equality, you’re fighting for equity. Those aren’t the same thing.
This…
3 Likes
There’s nothing wrong with equity.
That’s exactly what they said in Russia… How’d that work out for them?
The fact of the matter is that people are individuals… By promoting equity, you’re promoting treating those individuals by their group identity. I’ll let you educate yourself on how that went poorly in history.
Completely agree. Hence why I said this above:
But educating hiring staff and working to fight internal bias are not the same thing as saying our goal is to be 50% female. Not the same thing at all.
Edit: Your goal should be to remove gender from the equation. Whether you do that via hiring training, education, blind interview, or w/e. It should NOT be to fill a quota.
3 Likes
Meh…
Good PR and Investor letter. Hopefully, it does get implemented and helps out the employees. Ultimately means nothing to the customer.
im…surprised.
and now very, very hopeful for the future of the game, the company, and the people who work/will/want to work here.
it feels like he actually means it. hoping it all actually happens.
People talk about hiring tHe MoSt QuAlIfIeD candidate as if everyone has an equal chance to get equal qualifications out the door.
Bias and inequality doesn’t just happen at a hiring manager level. It’s pervasive on a systemic level.
The spoiled affluent cisgender heterosexual straight white engineer and the first generation minority engineer could have the same GPA and degree from the same school, but the former is the one who will be able to get by doing unpaid internships getting real world experience while the later works in retail because they can’t afford food and shelter otherwise.
The former will be more qualified than the later due to having that extra career relevant experience. However, the later achieving the same thing despite barriers to access is an achievement on its own.
Is it worth giving someone who has trumphed over extreme adversity despite slightly less (±5% less) experience qualification a shot instead of cisgender heterosexual straight white male engineer which would be the 9001st hired to the company?
please explain why?
There’s nothing wrong with fighting for equity.