You don't think that sudden, radical, and politically motivated change in the core leadership of a company doesn't have long-lasting and compounding effects?
Company slowly becomes worse and worse.
Me: "That starting gun surely signaled the start of the decline."
You: "That was a long time ago. Couldn't have been that."
What are second-order consequences?
What actually changed was they got rid of a rug, a tweet was posted, and some feminists (do you even know if they work there anymore?) were part of the charge and that pissed you off enough you're still talking about it a decade later.
And despite this strong conviction you have, you've provided 0 references (you didn't even cite the original incident, I had to figure out what you were talking about) or evidence in several back and forth messages to support up your position, which you're on the hook to prove since you made the claim. To me it sounds like you're talking out of your rear.
Feel free to have the last word on this one, but I won't be responding again since I've made my point thoroughly and there hasn't been anything added to the discussion since 3 posts ago, cheers.
You can't just use the word "merit" and claim the CEO's literal statement about meritocracy no longer being one of their virtues means nothing.
"Your honor, my client may have committed grand larceny, but he was certainly GRAND enough to order the GRAND SLAM at Denny's."
>do you even know if they work there anymore?
Yes
>And despite this strong conviction you have, you've provided 0 references (you didn't even cite the original incident, I had to figure out...
So you're unfamiliar with the period of GitHub history you're speaking about as if you have knowledge and authority. Why didn't you ask questions and seek to learn? At what point did you disagree with my theory, before or after you did a cursory search on a single facet of my argument?
>I won't be responding again since I've made my point thoroughly
>Feel free to have the last word
>there hasn't been anything added to the discussion since 3 posts ago
>cheers.
Spoken like a man who feels his argument is defensible and reasoned, clearly, because if this is the manner in which you have debates, you likely always feel that way.