[TLightful]

Care to define what those "fairly minor infractions of the groupthink" were?

With respect, and I'm not saying this is you, but often I've heard that type of line - and then when you get into the detail, the firing was an obvious correct decision.

Edit: lol @ the downvotes, you can k!ss my @ss. Glad to have you here as I guess you were rejected from Parler.

[dang]

Please don't break the site guidelines like that. Getting downvoted sucks, but it happens to everyone and one condition of participating in threads here is not to make them go haywire when it happens.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Edit: you've unfortunately been posting flamebait and/or unsubstantive comments repeatedly elsewhere as well. Can you please not? We're trying for something different here.

[zepto]

Firing is a straw man.

Obviously it’s usually justified because there are legal consequences otherwise.

The problem is all the other things that can happen that aren’t firing.

[kjjjjjjjjjjjjjj]

Given the context is the dogmatic approach to office culture, this comment is super ironic. Of course the firings were a correct decision from your (insane and skewed) perspective.

[TLightful]

>>Given the context is the dogmatic approach to office culture, this comment is super ironic. Of course the firings were a correct decision from your (insane and skewed) perspective.

Without the facts of the matter, you're talking out of your h'arse.

Either firings are legal or not. They have nothing to do with office culture.

Insane and skewed? ... yes, yes you are. Well done for identifying it, it's just your aim is about 180 degrees wrong. I imagine you have that issue frequently in life.

Have a nice day :) (you absolute, unmitigated pr!ck, lol)