[bmiller2]

Well they left all the juicy parts out

Context: https://www.theverge.com/2021/1/15/22232766/github-employees...

I can’t believe people talk like this on a work public channel.

[biermic]

Independent from the events: The way Github employees communicate with each other makes me kind of uncomfortable.

In the companies I've worked here in Europe, such discussions just would not happen in a cooperate chat room.

[Griffinsauce]

I don't think that has anything to do with being in Europe or not.

The emotions and opinions exist in all workplaces. Some are just open to it and others not. The important part is being respectful and having empathy.

The second employee was arguing in obvious bad faith, that apparently being accepted (to the point of the first being fired) is what should make people uncomfortable.

[sam_lowry_]

Last week in Europe, I was reprimanded by an US-based C-level exec for using the word "annoying" while asking a question about email filtering in a corporate Slack channel. Can't imagine being still employed if I used the word Nazi there.

People in US are broadcasting hypocrisy onto the world.

None can feel safe.

[m1]

Not only uncomfortable but it’s also somewhat embarrassing. I’ve always thought GitHub would be a pretty good place to work but judging from those chats I think I would definitely avoid.

[kitsune_]

These kind of discussions happen in many work chats in Europe.

[blondin]

i agree with you.

[odiroot]

Yes, we don't take calling anyone "Nazi" lightly. Well, at least level-headed people don't.

It's disrespectful to the people who were imprisoned, tortured and exterminated by the real Nazis.

[btown]

> I can't believe people talk like this on a work public channel.

Not sure if you're referring to the instance of the egregious anti-Semitic joke (CW for that link, btw), or to the bulk of the communications, but for any who feel the latter, that any conversation involving Nazism is improper, I'd consider a counterpoint:

We're in an industry where it's very easy for our work to be used for horrible things, where indeed there are historical examples of technology being used to accelerate the operations of genocide, and it's not only appropriate but essential that the employees of companies be allowed to call out fascism, and express their fear and dismay of Nazis, to colleagues whenever they see it, regardless of whether it is immediately linked to a product initiative.

The comment that states "you dont see 'commie' being dropped in the workplace nor should 'nazi,' it's just slandering" is the false equivalency of the century, and if we can't distinguish between words that over-simplify a political ideology, vs. words that concisely warn colleagues that something is going beyond political ideology and towards a pattern of racially-motivated behavior that places people in grave danger, we haven't learned our lessons from history.

[YeBanKo]

> The comment that states "you dont see 'commie' being dropped in the workplace nor should 'nazi,' it's just slandering" is the false equivalency of the century

That comment about slandering is a bs and a person making it is a hypocrite. There were people, whose clothes literally manifested that they were Nazis. Camp Auschwitz, 6MWE, there is no guesswork, they themselves declared that they are Nazis.

[pc86]

I think we agree on the larger point but I disagree with a couple of your points here.

> it's not only appropriate but essential that the employees of companies be allowed to call out fascism, and express their fear and dismay of Nazis, to colleagues whenever they see it

Fascism is the reprehensible government structure du jour but I think it's wrong to be single-sided here. Employees should be allowed to call out things they disagree with. It doesn't necessarily mean anything will happen, and they end up leaving the company because of it. But I do think there are quite a few conservative, non-fascist, anti-Nazi people who will read a "employees can call out fascism!" comment and feel at least a bit like it's meant toward them as more conservative that most people in tech. I was a #nevertrump Republican throughout the primary and changed my party registration the day after his nomination. I think he's done 10x the damage to conservatism than Nixon ever could have. But I'm sure there are people here who, because I was a registered Republican during the Obama administration, view me as a fascist. I'm positive there are people who are registered Republicans today who hate what Trump is doing (both to the party and to the country), working in tech, and reading HN right now.

> regardless of whether it is immediately linked to a product initiative

This I'm not so sure about. I mean GitHub exists to ship software, and for the most part if you're communicating over a GitHub channel it should probably be about that. The fact that they have DEI channels and race-based channels and such on the official Slack in the first place is probably a larger discussion in itself.

> The comment that states "you dont see 'commie' being dropped in the workplace nor should 'nazi,' it's just slandering" is the false equivalency of the century, and if we can't distinguish between words that over-simplify a political ideology, vs. words that concisely warn colleagues that something is going beyond political ideology and towards a pattern of racially-motivated behavior that places people in grave danger, we haven't learned our lessons from history.

With regard to the 6th specifically, absolutely agree.

With regard to the language more generally, though, you're assuming that "commie" is always an over-simplification and "nazi" never is. Something actually are communism, which is responsible for a couple hundred million deaths historically, so while not directly racially related, it's not exactly a great thing. Commie also doesn't have quite the negative connotation of Nazi, and rightfully so. So even arguing the point feels a little like arguing about "cracker" vs. the n word. One is obviously worse, regardless of context.

[drstewart]

Except that the comments weren't in the context of any product initiative or related to company business at all.

I'm sure Christians or other religious sects feel that it's essential that they proselytize their gospel to you, but I don't think you'd be very happy if you were getting bombarded with messages about it at work.

There's really no reason the kinds of conversations linked above should be happening with frequency in a company chat room. If you want to be an activist, great. Do it after hours.

[raverbashing]

> The employee was chastised for using divisive language, according to news first reported by Business Insider.

For calling, erm, Nazis Nazis? (and yes, given the photos of the event that monicker can be applied to some people present there)

No wonder the head of HR quit, this is such top level corporate PR BS that it's hard to justify.

[zaksoup]

I want to say: I don't talk as casually as this in a work channel, though I do sometimes discuss politics and current events. That's not because I don't think it's professional, but rather because I'm jewish and what happened to this employee feels like a very present threat.

It is a well-documented fact that neo-nazi hate groups were a significant presence in the riot and preceding "protest" at the capital. Stating that fact ultimately lead to a nazi-apologist coworker denying it, and then the jewish employee being fired.

[read_if_gay_]

> Stating that fact ultimately lead to a nazi-apologist coworker denying it

Where?

[briefcomment]

So unprofessional.

[aerovistae]

Thanks for the link! And yeah agreed.

[sjs382]

> "100% of Nazis were there" -- it's likely false. How do you even know 100% of Nazis were there?

This is misquoted. There is no "of" in the original chat. "100% Nazis were there" translates to something akin to "truth: Nazis were there."