jakee
-
Content
25,130 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
76 -
Feedback
0%
Everything posted by jakee
-
In what way do you want to achieve it if you refuse to allow people to take any steps towards it? Right - a checklist packed with subjective, gut feel criteria. And now hang on a minute - not quite perfect because you end up with people entirely unsuitable to perform the job at all? Just a second ago we were talking about hiring the people who were definitively, measurably the absolute best possible candidates available and nothing else will do. Now we find that the process is still so flawed that you’re still ending up with people who are just plain incompetent? With that in mind, how on earth do you think you are actually measuring your success at hiring the one single best candidate of all the people who applied in that round?
-
You are confused. DEI is something that companies choose to do. You are falsely calling them racist for doing it and trying to prevent them from using it. You are trying to increase the rules that companies have to abide by. But at least we’ve clarified that everything you’ve said so far is a smokescreen for the real issue. You just don’t think people should be told not to be racist.
-
The fact that you just went on to produce an enormous list of mostly subjective criteria including the need for multiple interviews would put the lie to that assertion. Again - you know your posts stay visible for more than 3 minutes, yeah? Sounds great and all… it’s just that you think it’s better for the racist hirers to continue with their racist hiring practices than for organisations to put any effort into trying to be less racist.
-
First honest thing you've said since coming back.
-
So you understand that this is literally what happens all the time, right? Because there is rarely any such thing as the definitive most qualified candidate. Again, if you have ten people with first class degrees from the top ranked universities in the country, one of them is gay and the boss doesn't like gays, 2 of them are black and the boss doesn't know how to relate to black people... are they getting hired?
-
You know the posts you make here stay visible for longer than 3 minutes, yes?
-
There you go now, people hire based on subjective criteria, they don't just hire the most qualified person. Follow that thought a step or two further down the road and you might just start to see the light. (Not the very bright covid light though, you remember how bad that made you look last time!)
-
Hehehe ok, it's my fault you're talking bollocks. That's fine, at least we agree it's bollocks.
-
There goes that thing about assuming a minority will be a 'meh' employee again. I think there's a word for that. I also love this idea that you always know who the most qualified applicant is. Like, why even bother interviewing, right? Hiring the best talent is easy! Like when the Mercedes F1 team announced a diversity initiative the trolls moaned about how they should always just pick the most qualified candidate. When they advertise for graduate positions they're probably going to have 50 applications from people with fesh first class degrees from Cambridge, Oxford, UCL and other top engineering schools throughout the country and the continent. Which one would be the most qualified?
-
FYI, you're getting a bit wierd and creepy.
-
You think violent criminals in the US don't already know they're in danger of a violent death? You think that just one more example will get the message through and the US will suddenly cease to have such a staggeringly massive rate of gun murders? There goes that thing about the right being addicted to simplistic solutions again.
-
Then why are we discussing imaginary situations in imaginary TurtleWorld instead of dealing with reality?
-
You seem to have forgotten that you posted the story as an incontrovertable example of gun ownership being a good thing. Whether the guy made the right decision with the information he had is irrelevant. I don't know why you think that's what we're talking about. The question is whether the presence of a legal gun owner made the situation better, or if it put everyone present in significantly more danger than they otherwise were.
-
Sure. But the guy who is a good example for gun ownership is the person who put them in real danger.
-
I mean yes, but... Say what now? BTW does anyone remember the contrail over the California coast that a bunch of people swore must be a ballistic missile launch because it was glowing in the sunset? Sometimes the internet really is just a great big stupid factory.
-
If you think about it, no-one was actually in danger until the good guy started shooting. Turtle - did you go out of your way to try and find the worst possible example to use?
-
Mr Bleach is back!!! Ah mate how have you been? I'm genuinely so happy to see the UV treatments haven't killed you. This really is the SC greatest hits reunion tour. Of all the Turtlespeed things you've ever said this must be one of the most Turtley. I mean, it's genuinely insane, isn't it? It bares no resemblance whatsoever to the reality that any of us live in. Frankly, it's verging dangerously close to sounding like you think it's impossible to find a diverse person who is also competent.
-
Lol, OK. MLK didn't explicitly discuss concepts that hadn't been fucking invented yet and therefore he wouldn't have liked them. Grade A analysis yet again sir. Have you got any dressing for that word salad?
-
So when the amendment passed and it was immediately put into practice the wrong way, you have a record of ‘the author’ saying “hey wait, that’s not what I meant” do you?
-
Do you mean in the same way the country I’m in at any given time has lawful jurisdiction over me?
-
What jurisdiction do they have?
-
Every court except the one populated by people chosen solely for their willingness to revoke Roe thought that Roe was constitutional. Just as an aside, you righties have been on another level since popping back up after the election. The avalanche of hypocritical partisan bat-shit crazy that’s been on display over the last month has been truly special.
-
Well that’s just a bunch of bollocks, isn’t it? What is a foreign government’s jurisdiction over a person not in their country?
-
Oh darlin' - you didn't even listen to your own source, did you? Levin's argument is that illegal aliens can't be tried for crimes they commit in the US. Do you agree with him?
-
He says illegal aliens committing crimes in the USA can't be put on trial under US law. Do you agree with that?
