Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
User Journal

Journal Journal: Aw man 1

Wont say what site or where - but I'm working on migrating something that was hosted in one of our offices to a shared hosting environment.

Comment Re:Easy stats to pull (Score 1) 367

The false sense of urgency people have simply because they can is getting ridiculous. I can accept that probably 1% of phone calls are actually urgent. What I can't accept is the 75% of calls that people think are ugent. What's the old saying, "Your lack of planning does not constitute an emergency on my part."

Wow. That must be one handy number of a job you've landed for yourself. I take it you don't have children either.

Comment Re:No (Score 1) 824

Reposted due to moderation abuse. See you in metamod.

This isn't about his "private beliefs", it's about his open funding for a hate campaign. The article is deliberately inflammatory, portraying this as being about a CEO's personal beliefs, but it's actually 100% about his actions.

CEOs are major figureheads, and their actions reflect on the businesses they run. You rule yourself out of qualification for certain jobs if you act in certain ways, such as actively supporting discrimination against many of the people you supposedly potentially lead.

And right now we have the usual suspects who've latched on to the fact that many people still hate gays as an excuse to bash homosexuals when they have the audacity to to stand up for themselves, who are proposing that this has something to do with this guy's personal beliefs.

If he'd donated money to a group proposing ending women's suffrage, we wouldn't be having this debate. The guy wouldn't be CEO.

If he'd donated money to a group proposing the re-institution of slavery for any black enfranchised as a consequence of the Civil War, we wouldn't be having this debate. The guy wouldn't be CEO.

But this is "OK", because he wants gays treated abusively?

No fucking way. If the Mozilla Foundation wants him to be a CTO, or a programmer, or a coffee maker, or a team leader, or a division head, or whatever, that's fine. But he's not suitable for the role of CEO. End of story. He's not qualified to lead.

Comment Re:No (Score -1, Flamebait) 824

(Reposted due to moderation abuse)

This isn't about his "private beliefs", it's about his open funding for a hate campaign. The article is deliberately inflammatory, portraying this as being about a CEO's personal beliefs, but it's actually 100% about his actions.

CEOs are major figureheads, and their actions reflect on the businesses they run. You rule yourself out of qualification for certain jobs if you act in certain ways, such as actively supporting discrimination against many of the people you supposedly potentially lead.

And right now we have the usual suspects who've latched on to the fact that many people still hate gays as an excuse to bash homosexuals when they have the audacity to to stand up for themselves, who are proposing that this has something to do with this guy's personal beliefs.

If he'd donated money to a group proposing ending women's suffrage, we wouldn't be having this debate. The guy wouldn't be CEO.

If he'd donated money to a group proposing the re-institution of slavery for any black enfranchised as a consequence of the Civil War, we wouldn't be having this debate. The guy wouldn't be CEO.

But this is "OK", because he wants gays treated abusively?

No fucking way. If the Mozilla Foundation wants him to be a CTO, or a programmer, or a coffee maker, or a team leader, or a division head, or whatever, that's fine. But he's not suitable for the role of CEO. End of story. He's not qualified to lead.

Comment Re:No (Score 1) 824

Are you seriously suggesting there has ever been a time in history where someone's actions have played no role in deciding whether they're qualified for a specific job?

Yes, it was absurd and evil to disqualify communists from being actors or screenwriters. Would it also have been absurd and evil to disqualify someone from being head of the CIA because of past, undisclaimed, material support for the CCCP?

Allowed HTML


    • URLs http://example.com/ will auto-link a URL Important Stuff Please try to keep posts on topic. Try to reply to other people's comments instead of starting new threads. Read other people's messages before posting your own to avoid simply duplicating what has already been said. Use a clear subject that describes what your message is about. Offtopic, Inflammatory, Inappropriate, Illegal, or Offensive comments might be moderated. (You can read everything, even moderated posts, by adjusting your threshold on the User Preferences Page) Slow Down Cowboy! Slashdot requires you to wait between each successful posting of a comment to allow everyone a fair chance at posting a comment. It's been 3 minutes since you last successfully posted a comment Chances are, you're behind a firewall or proxy, or clicked the Back button to accidentally reuse a form. Please try again. If the problem persists, and all other options have been tried, contact the site administrator. If you are having a problem with accounts or comment posting, please yell for help. So here is your nontroversy of the afternoon: Donald Trump is furious that Barack Obama has mentioned the possibility of a terrorist nuclear attack on Manhattan, because, as he told Fox Newsâ(TM)s Greta Van Susteren today, the President âoejust put a big target on Manhattan.â Damn you, Obama! If only you had kept Manhattan a secret, no terrorist ever would have thought to attack it, and the city would remain safe from terrorist attacks, just like it was during George W. Bushâ(TM)s blemish-free reign. Read more at http://wonkette.com/#m4TQ3Etgd... Slow Down Cowboy! Slashdot requires you to wait between each successful posting of a comment to allow everyone a fair chance at posting a comment. It's been 4 minutes since you last successfully posted a comment Chances are, you're behind a firewall or proxy, or clicked the Back button to accidentally reuse a form. Please try again. If the problem persists, and all other options have been tried, contact the site administrator.

Comment Re:No (Score -1, Flamebait) 824

This isn't about his "private beliefs", it's about his open funding for a hate campaign. The article is deliberately inflammatory, portraying this as being about a CEO's personal beliefs, but it's actually 100% about his actions.

CEOs are major figureheads, and their actions reflect on the businesses they run. You rule yourself out of qualification for certain jobs if you act in certain ways, such as actively supporting discrimination against many of the people you supposedly potentially lead.

And right now we have the usual suspects who've latched on to the fact that many people still hate gays as an excuse to bash homosexuals when they have the audacity to to stand up for themselves, who are proposing that this has something to do with this guy's personal beliefs.

If he'd donated money to a group proposing ending women's suffrage, we wouldn't be having this debate. The guy wouldn't be CEO.

If he'd donated money to a group proposing the re-institution of slavery for any black enfranchised as a consequence of the Civil War, we wouldn't be having this debate. The guy wouldn't be CEO.

But this is "OK", because he wants gays treated abusively?

No fucking way. If the Mozilla Foundation wants him to be a CTO, or a programmer, or a coffee maker, or a team leader, or a division head, or whatever, that's fine. But he's not suitable for the role of CEO. End of story. He's not qualified to lead.

Comment i think dems will have a better canidate though (Score 1) 35

as much as i would like to see hillary in the oval office, i think another dem will win the primaries. as for the republicans who is gonna vote for those pricks anyways. making it so women and the poor can't vote. you can no longer vote if you ever have changed your last name without certified proof of every marriage, divorce, and your birth. while men only need proof of being born to vote. and then proof of citizen status if not born in the usa.
this is an unfair precident to take away the right to vote from women and the poor. and it's happening in EVERY state with a republican govenor. well at least in wisconsin. i haven't verified if it's everyone or just swing states that got this treatment for the problem of poor people and women who vote, for democrats.

Slashdot Top Deals

After the last of 16 mounting screws has been removed from an access cover, it will be discovered that the wrong access cover has been removed.

Working...