Support NeoGAF

[ItJustWorks]

I don't see anything like that either, but I think the discussion has moved beyond that anyway.


Because this is an entirely different statement already. What are "DEI hires"? Perhaps this is just a discussion about definitions, but I assume they're people who were hired specifically to "improve diversity." So I would agree with that statement. Meritocracy takes a backseat when a potential employee's identity is deemed more or as important as their actual credentials. Seems completely logical to me.

Employers take alot of things into consideration outside the credentials when hiring. Why are we pretending that isn't a thing?

They make sure the baseline qualifications are there, and then choose who they fucking "like". There was never a meritocracy, it becomes vibes. How many jobs will hire "stans buddy that he reccomended" or "that cute girl for the office" or "man, jack was hilarious in the interview great personality". When Johnny over there went to a better school, but kinda a drag in terms of personality so they chose Larry. Johnny doesn't get that credentials aren't all that matter when interviewing. Hell, "Over-qualified" was term that existed before DEI was a thing. Thats the real world.

One company might be trying to market to women a bit more, so it is good business strategy to look for a female co marketing director to add to the staff, she brings value due to her perspective.

 

[Woopah]

Because this is an entirely different statement already. What are "DEI hires"? Perhaps this is just a discussion about definitions, but I assume they're people who were hired specifically to "improve diversity." So I would agree with that statement. Meritocracy takes a backseat when a potential employee's identity is deemed more or as important as their actual credentials. Seems completely logical to me.

I agree that's it's an issue of definition.

Basically we can use "DEI hires" in that way, but we should avoid assuming "this company does DEI, therefore they definitely do DEI hires and therefore that's definitely the main cause of any problems".

 

[kurisu_1974]

Notice how I never actually said the words "racist" in this thread, but that's okay, because you are using the subtext of my words to draw that conclusion correct? Well, I can do the same...I can use the subtext of the "that woman/black person is probably DEI" or "the game is bad because of Diversity hires" to conclude that you think those groups are somehow generally less competent or lower IQ.

And who is "everyone"? Everyone here shares the same opinions? You speak as if I specifically said "all of you neogaf members" nope. I said that people who blame DEI for a game being bad prior to all other variables, and assume a woman or a person of color is DEI by the nature of them being there, are basically assuming they are less competent and qualified by default.

Are you telling me that is you? That you blame DEI games being bad? Is that why you're offended? Because it certainly doesn't look good.

This was an irrational response. I gave my input and expanded on that conclusion. You have yet to retort, or even engage with the concept of it being a logical fallacy.

 

[InterMusketeer]

And I made my case, saying alot more than only utilizing an *appropriate* Elon example. Like how the logic is generally flawed. You just don't like it because that example coincides with the thought process, and how that makes the "I blame DEI" people look. But hey, it's the same shit lol

Your first contribution to the thread was that you believed people who distrust DEI do so only because they secretly think minorities are less intelligent. A baffling statement, and a prime example of both an ad hominem and a straw man. Even in this short text again you're filling in what I like or want, based on nothing but your own assumptions. You haven't demonstrated the capacity for a normal discussion, so of course no one's going to take you or your "case" seriously.

Notice nobody even denounced that type of assumption or differentiated their ideas from Elon. They just got upset and called names...

Good. Why would they? You misinterpret and misrepresent their arguments and then ask them to distance themselves from your fabrications. No surprise they just ignore your ramblings.

Employers take alot of things into consideration outside the credentials when hiring. Why are we pretending that isn't a thing?

No one's pretending anything. It just has nothing to do with discrimination based on immutable characteristics in hiring as a policy.

I agree that's it's an issue of definition.

Basically we can use "DEI hires" in that way, but we should avoid assuming "this company does DEI, therefore they definitely do DEI hires and therefore that's definitely the main cause of any problems".

People's experiences with DEI have been so bad that they assume the worst, yes. I don't think you can avoid that, and I'm not sure you can even argue they're wrong for feeling that way.

 

[StueyDuck]

Look how hostile you are becoming, it's almost as if I called you out specifically or something lol and assuming my entire politics if I don't align on one issue? You enjoy an echo chamber my dear friend. This isn't a sports team.

Anyway, it's extremely simple. When your assumption that anything that is low quality primarily derives from "diversity initiatives", and that they are likely "less qualified" with no evidence to back this claim, and leapfrogging other more *likely* variables for why a game is bad. That is exactly like elon blaming the planes door coming off because of DEI (and assuming that pilot is DEI because of her race and gender). There is literally no difference.

Something went wrong, your first assumption is that the "diverse groups" are less qualified to be doing the job. Much of the time looking at a woman or a person of color and assuming they are DEI. So less qualified than...who exactly? Yes, that looks bad. That looks like you think certain groups are less competent than your own. Sorry to break it to you.

Now how about present some evidence that DEI is to blame for a game being bad.



And I made my case, saying alot more than only utilizing an *appropriate* Elon example. Like how the logic is generally flawed. You just don't like it because that example coincides with the thought process, and how that makes the "I blame DEI" people look. But hey, it's the same shit lol Notice nobody even denounced that type of assumption or differentiated their ideas from Elon. They just got upset and called names...

not once has it ever occurred to you that maybe the people who created DEI and formed these correlations that most people make, are the ones to blame for the disastrous race/gender/sex relations in recent years?

people are connecting dots because those are the lines being drawn by the people implementing these radical ideologies. Instead of covering your eyes with your hands and going "lalalalala" maybe look at the source of the issue rather than blaming people who simply just notice that an illegitimate advantage was given.

If DEI never existed, no one would ever think X got their job because of Y or Z, but now you have a literal Corporate mandate that literally says the X got the position because of Y and Z, even if they are the most qualified candidate for the position (it's never worked that way, and it never will). People will always connect that line back to DEI.

and guess what, it now makes that new hire's life an absolute misery because people's eyes will be watching and judging them like a hawk at literally everything that is being done waiting for the first mistake to be made.

The root of the evil here is DEI and those who created/implemented it.

 

[Bernardougf]

[

Notice how I never actually said the words "racist" in this thread, but that's okay, because you are using the subtext of my words to draw that conclusion correct? Well, I can do the same...I can use the subtext of the "that woman/black person is probably DEI" or "the game is bad because of Diversity hires" to conclude that you think those groups are somehow generally less competent or lower IQ.

And who is "everyone"? Everyone here shares the same opinions? You speak as if I specifically said "all of you neogaf members" nope. I said that people who blame DEI for a game being bad prior to all other variables, and assume a woman or a person of color is DEI by the nature of them being there, are basically assuming they are less competent and qualified by default.

Are you telling me that is you? That you blame DEI games being bad? Is that why you're offended? Because it certainly doesn't look good.

This was an irrational response. I gave my input and expanded on that conclusion. You have yet to retort, or even engage with the concept of it being a logical fallacy.

Dont try to sugar coat the shit you said ... at least be a man and own it ..

You said this:

"These people want to believe that certain races are lower IQ than their own, and that if they make a game or ...anything it'll be worse than if their race made it."

You are calling people racists... so proove it.. it should be simple enough.. without bullshiting your way out of it...

Just post the quotes were anybody said anything about different races having less IQ or capability.

Until then you remain the clown you are.. so keep clowning.

 

[DeafTourette]

Y'all enjoy arguing over this... The Borg is leaving this thread ... And unfollowing it.

Oy vey... O dios mio... Mein gott...

 

[DeepEnigma]

If DEI was so good and virtuous, it would not need so much defense that it's not being practiced even when it's in mission statements

Nor would people be insulted by being called a DEI hire all the same if it's "good for companies and people."

It's emotional fear blackmail being weaponized against these companies as they tie themselves in PR knots. Deep down they know the truth.

 

[Dirk Benedict]

Y'all enjoy arguing over this... The Borg is leaving this thread ... And unfollowing it.

Oy vey... O dios mio... Mein gott...

You want to use the Lord's name in vain? It's Aye Dios Mio!

That said, Fuck DEI. I want to add something valuable here, but it's tough outside that opinion. Besides, some here already know where I stand with it. I could come in here and tear that shit down, but no need. Plenty of perfect posts here, highlighting my very same opinion.

 

[DeafTourette]

You want to use the Lord's name in vain? It's Aye Dios Mio!

That said, Fuck DEI. I want to add something valuable here, but it's tough outside that opinion. Besides, some here already know where I stand with it. I could come in here and tear that shit down, but no need. Plenty of perfect posts here, highlighting my very same opinion.

I can actually say something in this thread that has nothing to do with DEI or whatever...

The Lord's name isn't "God"... That's his title. Like El Shaddai. The KJV left out his name and just called him God. Look up the Tetragrammaton.

And thank you for correcting me. Having an old man brain fart! LoL!

Now I'll go back to unfollowing the thread.

 

[Dirk Benedict]

I can actually say something in this thread that has nothing to do with DEI or whatever...

The Lord's name isn't "God"... That's his title. Like El Shaddai. The KJV left out his name and just called him God. Look up the Tetragrammaton.

And thank you for correcting me. Having an old man brain fart! LoL!

Now I'll go back to unfollowing the thread.

I won't get into semantics. Unfollow away, however!
I don't blame you. While I don't partake in these discussions too much, I should. It's a problem that some think isn't as pervasive as it actually is.

 

[DarkstarRising13]

~Ahhh, so the out-of-touch CEO of the once great developer CD Projekt Red is trying to play dumb and think that disgusting form of black supremacy, anti-white and anti-male propaganda, pro-feminist and uglyfication of women that is DEI that Sweet Baby Inc and other consultant groups have been forcing through blackmail amongst many different games is suddenly not present within his company.

Oh, WOW! Just how stupid did he think we are? Has Kabrutus's list on Steam not reached his out-of-touch ears now?

 

[samoilaaa]

ofc they hire based on merit and talent alone

 

[Herbspiceguy]

not once has it ever occurred to you that maybe the people who created DEI and formed these correlations that most people make, are the ones to blame for the disastrous race/gender/sex relations in recent years?

people are connecting dots because those are the lines being drawn by the people implementing these radical ideologies. Instead of covering your eyes with your hands and going "lalalalala" maybe look at the source of the issue rather than blaming people who simply just notice that an illegitimate advantage was given.

If DEI never existed, no one would ever think X got their job because of Y or Z, but now you have a literal Corporate mandate that literally says the X got the position because of Y and Z, even if they are the most qualified candidate for the position (it's never worked that way, and it never will). People will always connect that line back to DEI.

and guess what, it now makes that new hire's life an absolute misery because people's eyes will be watching and judging them like a hawk at literally everything that is being done waiting for the first mistake to be made.

The root of the evil here is DEI and those who created/implemented it.

Yes, forcing DEI actually leads to more division, distust and discontent within the workplace, which leads to a growing discriminatory/racist sentiment within society. I'm experiencing this first hand within the government organization I work for.
It's going to take a while for this ironic and contradictory conclusion to be publically accepted and a generation or two to recover the damage that's been done.
I've been reading how some ppl think it's petty or childish to be concerned about DEI. I'll say it's the most mature thing to be critical, stand up and not accept inititiaves that are clearly detrimental to society and businesses.

 

[StueyDuck]

Yes, forcing DEI actually leads to more division, distust and discontent within the workplace, which leads to a growing discriminatory/racist sentiment within society. I'm experiencing this first hand within the government organization I work for.
It's going to take a while for this ironic and contradictory conclusion to be publically accepted and a generation or two to recover the damage that's been done.
I've been reading how some ppl think it's petty or childish to be concerned about DEI. I'll say it's the most mature thing to be critical, stand up and not accept inititiaves that are clearly detrimental to society and businesses.

Well... I can only provide an anecdotal bit of information for a similar scenario. But a good friend of mine had been passed over for promotion for the last 5 or so years. She is Indian ethnically but about as South African as they come, all her peers on her team had received promotions and she recently started fighting it because it's pretty fucked up.

Turns out, she was not getting the promotion because of an unwritten but enforce rule that non African employees don't receive promotions.

She told me about this and I asked her what her team is like and it's 4 other guys. I told her to just pull the gender card, she is not a shit stirrer and doesn't want to upset the system but eventually she did bring up the fact that she was a woman and she was being discriminated against. I kid you not within 3 months HR was involved and her promotion is essentially on track to happen in the next few weeks.

So with that one incident, which I'm sure there's many all over the west, a person was refused a promotion because of skin color until they pulled gender into the discussion. Which tells you the identity politics in the work place is definitely a major issue.

Now we are south africa, we've got a whole entire headache of laws and legislation on top of things like DEI that would honestly make the most modest of business men/women fall off their chair in laughter. Hence why our economy is fucked and only China really wants to do business with us, but things like DEI still manages to find it's way into our corporate structure on top of all the mental shenanigans going on.

 

[Angry_Megalodon]

If CDPROJEKT is DEI then let them keep it. They are shitting on everyone.

Name me another first person rpg that is doing everything to the degree that Cyberpunk does. Most of these kids grade FROM games on a curve where the damn mouths don't move and the mechanics are 2 gens behind, with no story. Yet FROM has no "DEI". And gets handicap points from the community.

Whereas if Rockstar or CDPR has a diverse staff and their shit looks ambitious and amazing then...wtf are we talking about?

Lol, what. FROM's gameplay and worldbuilding is like galaxies ahead of anything CD Projekt can create.

"No story" hahaha my dear lord.

I won't bother with the on-topic posts cos they are even more deluded.

 

[Touch fuzZy. get BizZay]

Lol, what. FROM's gameplay and worldbuilding is like galaxies ahead of anything CD Projekt can create.

"No story" hahaha my dear lord.

I won't bother with the on-topic posts cos they are even more deluded.

Yeah although I like the gameplay more than lore I actually unironically do forgive Zanzibart

 

[Woopah]

People's experiences with DEI have been so bad that they assume the worst, yes. I don't think you can avoid that, and I'm not sure you can even argue they're wrong for feeling that way.

By the same token all the people with positive DEI experiences should always assume the best.

I think the better approach to take is to actually look at the DEI actions and reports a company does, rather than making assumptions.

 

[InterMusketeer]

By the same token all the people with positive DEI experiences should always assume the best.

They probably do. People who benefit from it will push it heavily. Is that not what we've been seeing in this industry?

I think the better approach to take is to actually look at the DEI actions and reports a company does, rather than making assumptions.

Sounds reasonable, but the ideology at the base of DEI initiatives is toxic and dangerous to begin with, dividing people according to their identities and then assigning value to them. In addition, the details about how companies implement these initiatives are unknown to the customer. Skepticism is natural. Companies will just have to convince them of their good intentions.

 

[Woopah]

They probably do. People who benefit from it will push it heavily. Is that not what we've been seeing in this industry?


Sounds reasonable, but the ideology at the base of DEI initiatives is toxic and dangerous to begin with, dividing people according to their identities and then assigning value to them. In addition, the details about how companies implement these initiatives are unknown to the customer. Skepticism is natural. Companies will just have to convince them of their good intentions.

But the "ideology" doesn't have to be that. Nothing that CDPR or Nintendo have said about DEI is toxic or dangerous.

The way DEI should be used is to attract, retain and develop talent.

But what we see too often instead is it being used as a marketing strategy for "modern audiences", or as a "juke the stats" type thing from The Wire.

 

[InterMusketeer]

But the "ideology" doesn't have to be that. Nothing that CDPR or Nintendo have said about DEI is toxic or dangerous.

The ideology is the source it spawned from. If companies apply its tenets only partially, or only use its terminology, that still doesn't mean DEI itself is good. At best they're legitimizing it by paying lip service to it.

The way DEI should be used is to attract, retain and develop talent.

I'd argue DEI shouldn't even exist as a concept, and anyone who involves themselves with it has likely lost their way. The only letter within DEI that actually matters to a company is the I. Anyone should be able to apply, anyone should be able to be hired and everyone who works their should feel content. The D doesn't matter and the E has no place in the type of hierarchical structures that exist within companies.

 

[Angry_Megalodon]

About "meritocracy versus DEI" this recent news settles the score once and for all. We have DEI wackos banning words. You can't get more Orwellian than that.

BBC boss says word ‘talent’ banned as workplace culture review begins

Tim Davie says corporation is committed to change after series of scandals including that surrounding Huw Edwards

www.theguardian.com

Quote:

BBC boss says word ‘talent’ banned as workplace culture review begins

Davie said no one at the corporation was “indispensable”. He told Robinson: “We often refer to people like yourself as talent, but I’ve kind of banned that. You’re a presenter, I’m a leader of the organisation, and we’re here to serve.

“I do think over the last decade or so we’ve seen fundamental changes in the culture in this industry, and it hasn’t been completely unique [to the BBC that] those that have had power in places can often use that in bad ways. I think the BBC is utterly committed – you see us acting in good faith to get at this [issue] – and I would say [it is] important that everyone is treated equally regardless of rank.”

 

[ItJustWorks]

[

Dont try to sugar coat the shit you said ... at least be a man and own it ..

You said this:

"These people want to believe that certain races are lower IQ than their own, and that if they make a game or ...anything it'll be worse than if their race made it."

You are calling people racists... so proove it.. it should be simple enough.. without bullshiting your way out of it...

Just post the quotes were anybody said anything about different races having less IQ or capability.

Until then you remain the clown you are.. so keep clowning.

Lol Okay, show me a quote where I called everyone racist. In those specific words. Are you using your interpretation through subtext? (You won't answer this)

I told you exact why this "blame DEI" thought process is basically "these groups are less competent" in multiple posts, in multiple ways.

Less competent, lower IQ, less qualified, they all fall under the same underlying assumptions that certain groups by default are "less".

Just admit you can't debate, pro tip: I can dismatle you assertion I called everyone racist by also asking for a quote of me saying that specifically, and you shouldn't have said "everyone". Just some advice if you want to win a debate in the future.

 

[ItJustWorks]

not once has it ever occurred to you that maybe the people who created DEI and formed these correlations that most people make, are the ones to blame for the disastrous race/gender/sex relations in recent years?

people are connecting dots because those are the lines being drawn by the people implementing these radical ideologies. Instead of covering your eyes with your hands and going "lalalalala" maybe look at the source of the issue rather than blaming people who simply just notice that an illegitimate advantage was given.

If DEI never existed, no one would ever think X got their job because of Y or Z, but now you have a literal Corporate mandate that literally says the X got the position because of Y and Z, even if they are the most qualified candidate for the position (it's never worked that way, and it never will). People will always connect that line back to DEI.

and guess what, it now makes that new hire's life an absolute misery because people's eyes will be watching and judging them like a hawk at literally everything that is being done waiting for the first mistake to be made.

The root of the evil here is DEI and those who created/implemented it.

Who's eyes are judging? The majority of people in united states, do not share that opinion.

79% of the u.s. isn't straight white male.

 

[DeepEnigma]

The majority of people in united states, do not share that opinion.

 

[Moneal]

Lol Okay, show me a quote where I called everyone racist. In those specific words. Are you using your interpretation through subtext? (You won't answer this)

I told you exact why this "blame DEI" thought process is basically "these groups are less competent" in multiple posts, in multiple ways.

Less competent, lower IQ, less qualified, they all fall under the same underlying assumptions that certain groups by default are "less".

Just admit you can't debate, pro tip: I can dismatle you assertion I called everyone racist by also asking for a quote of me saying that specifically, and you shouldn't have said "everyone". Just some advice if you want to win a debate in the future.

hum what is defined as thinking certain groups are less? You are just using the definition of racist instead of the word.

Who's eyes are judging? The majority of people in united states, do not share that opinion.

79% of the u.s. isn't straight white male.

you think only straight white males have that opinion?

 

[ItJustWorks]

Your first contribution to the thread was that you believed people who distrust DEI do so only because they secretly think minorities are less intelligent. A baffling statement, and a prime example of both an ad hominem and a straw man. Even in this short text again you're filling in what I like or want, based on nothing but your own assumptions. You haven't demonstrated the capacity for a normal discussion, so of course no one's going to take you or your "case" seriously.

I think in November you'll see alot of people take that case "seriously". Stop hanging out in echo chambers. Notice I dont mind engaging with differing opinions, but you guys however...

And again, yes...if your initial assumption behind something having "less quality" is Diversity initiatives, disregarding or not prioritizing more likely variables, then you are assuming that the demographic is by default less competent, as you don't have any information or evidence to determine these people are DEI. Just assumptions. It's extremely simple.

Good. Why would they? You misinterpret and misrepresent their arguments and then ask them to distance themselves from your fabrications. No surprise they just ignore your ramblings.

They aren't ignoring any "ramblings", I woke up to 20 notifications. So that's not true. they simply don't disagree with Elon. They likely would make the same correlation lol as they are doing the same in this gaming space. So point made really.

No one's pretending anything. It just has nothing to do with discrimination based on immutable characteristics in hiring as a policy.

So that employee that "knew a guy" and got him in, and the "hot chick that the guys wanted in the office" were fair and controllable game?

And again, I gave an example where at least the characteristics of being say...a co-marketing woman hire when a company is looking to say...market to women more, is a actually has tangible value. Same goes for other Demographics. The "friend of the friend" or "that hot girl" does not.

You also didn't counter "over-qualification"
As someone who actually did formal debates on these subjects...you guys could be better.

 

[Bernardougf]

Lol Okay, show me a quote where I called everyone racist. In those specific words. Are you using your interpretation through subtext? (You won't answer this)

I told you exact why this "blame DEI" thought process is basically "these groups are less competent" in multiple posts, in multiple ways.

Less competent, lower IQ, less qualified, they all fall under the same underlying assumptions that certain groups by default are "less".

Just admit you can't debate, pro tip: I can dismatle you assertion I called everyone racist by also asking for a quote of me saying that specifically, and you shouldn't have said "everyone". Just some advice if you want to win a debate in the future.

I wont debate a sjw clown who throws accusations from his ass, cant give one proof outside of strawmans or what your sick woke mind twists and spins of what other people say and is too much of a pussy soy boy to even own its accusations. This conversation is over. You are exposed.

 

[{insert code here}]

Man this guy's posts read like some gaslighting woke AI gone rogue.

There's no way that's a real person writing all that. Bots are everywhere, and they're sophisticated enough to go unnoticed even on forums like this but Jesus Christ man whoever trained this one needs to go back to the drawing board.

 

[ItJustWorks]

Pretty easy, we can use deductive reasoning. Hmm, what party generally wins the popular vote? Which Demographic complains about DEI the most? Which groups "benefit" from DEI the most? Which groups do not?

Then do the math lol

hum what is defined as thinking certain groups are less? You are just using the definition of racist instead of the word.

Oh so you are interpreting subtext, great! Then I can do the same when you correlate low quality products to DEI. See how that works?

you think only straight white males have that opinion?

Of course not, but it paints a picture when the majority of the Demographics in this country are beneficiaries of DEI lol remember, so it merely reinforces my statement that the majority of Americans don't feel that way.

 

[DeepEnigma]

Pretty easy, we can use deductive reasoning. Hmm, what party generally wins the popular vote? Which Demographic complains about DEI the most? Which groups "benefit" from DEI the most? Which groups do not?

Then do the math lol

That's not how it works el oh el

 

[ItJustWorks]

I wont debate a sjw clown who throws accusations from his ass, cant give one proof outside of strawmans or what your sick woke mind twists and spins of what other people say and is too much of a pussy soy boy to even own its accusations. This conversation is over. You are exposed.

What makes me an sjw? Lol. Because I don't share this point of view? On this subject? Holy monolith batman.

The fact that you are resorting to calling names, repeatedly, and wanting people to "go away to another forum" because they share a different opinion than you, is pretty snow flakey. Notice I dont need to do the same.

 

[InterMusketeer]

I think in November you'll see alot of people take that case "seriously".

???

Stop hanging out in echo chambers.

???

Notice I dont mind engaging with differing opinions, but you guys however...

I woke up to 20 notifications. So that's not true.

Way to contradict yourself within the same post.

As someone who actually did formal debates on these subjects...you guys could be better.

Man, if only we were all as competent and intelligent as you. Actually, you did praise someone for their intelligent response in this thread. Let me see... Huh, funny. That was a person who happened to agree with you. Interesting how that works.

But perhaps you could share the secret sauce with us. How can we be master debaters like you? How can we use all these logical fallacies to derail a discussion? I'd love to know how the master thinks.

 

[StueyDuck]

Who's eyes are judging? The majority of people in united states, do not share that opinion.

79% of the u.s. isn't straight white male.

i think you share more with racists than you think you do.

A) you assume all people who are affected by DEI are white

B) you assume all white people are racist it seems.

you have a lot of personal things to work out with your own assumptions. I don't think you are quite as in touch with the average person as you think you are

EDIT:

Another one of these accounts that are a year old with only 60 or so posts and mostly "owning chuds"

what's with these accounts popping up lately.

 

[Moneal]

Oh so you are interpreting subtext, great! Then I can do the same when you correlate low quality products to DEI. See how that works?

subtext is inferred meaning. you writing the definition of a word is and people calling that out is not them inferring or subtext. If someone said that a male liked other men and another person said they were called gay, that's not inferring or subtext. if the original person said the male had an odd taste in partners and the other person said they called them gay, that would be inferring and subtext.

 

[ItJustWorks]

???


???


Way to contradict yourself within the same post.

The content in many of those posts are hostile, name calling, assuming my politics, and asking me to go to the "purple" forum.

Notice I dont need to do the same.

Man, if only we were all as competent and intelligent as you. Actually, you did praise someone for their intelligent response in this thread. Let me see... Huh, funny. That was a person who happened to agree with you. Interesting how that works.

But perhaps you could share the secret sauce with us. How can we be master debaters like you? How can we use all these logical fallacies to derail a discussion? I'd love to know how the master thinks.

Drink alot of water and do alot of push ups. Play alot of Phoenix ace attorney

 

[ItJustWorks]

i think you share more with racists than you think you do.

A) you assume all people who are affected by DEI are white

B) you assume all white people are racist it seems.

Lol no I didn't. What a leap. It's simple logic, if 79% of the U.S. demo isnt say
.. straight white male, which is percieved to be impacted by DEI "negatively", yet the *majority* of the country is democratic, and also people of color or women..then listing that fact only reinforces that the majority of people dont share that "DEI is to blame" perspective. Purely on party demographics alone.

you have a lot of personal things to work out with your own assumptions. I don't think you are quite as in touch with the average person as you think you are

Lol I'm sure its more likely the average person isn't blaming bad video games on DEI, or even knows what sweet baby inc is. Lmao

EDIT:

Another one of these accounts that are a year old with only 60 or so posts and mostly "owning chuds"

what's with these accounts popping up lately.

mostly owning chuds? My first posts were about video games lol

 

[Bernardougf]

i think you share more with racists than you think you do.

A) you assume all people who are affected by DEI are white

B) you assume all white people are racist it seems.

you have a lot of personal things to work out with your own assumptions. I don't think you are quite as in touch with the average person as you think you are

EDIT:

Another one of these accounts that are a year old with only 60 or so posts and mostly "owning chuds"

what's with these accounts popping up lately.

Probably doing a test to enter the special club at resetera... must be their new form of evaluation for top members.

This and election year... he already mentioned musk some 30 times.. now "come november you will see" ...

Cant get more cartoonish than this.

 

[ItJustWorks]

subtext is inferred meaning. you writing the definition of a word is and people calling that out is not them inferring or subtext. If someone said that a male liked other men and another person said they were called gay, that's not inferring or subtext. if the original person said the male had an odd taste in partners and the other person said they called them gay, that would be inferring and subtext.

Well technically it is inferring subtext, that "guy that liked a guy" could claim to be pansexual, Bi, or just "had a moment". There's men in prison that had sex with men, that *still* claim straight. I don't agree, but people play those games.

And this doesn't negate the idea that I'm *also* calling out what blaming low quality products on DEI, and assuming people of color or women are DEI by default, really is.

It's assuming less competence.

 

[InterMusketeer]

The content in many of those posts are hostile, name calling, assuming my politics, and asking me to go to the "purple" forum.

Notice I dont need to do the same.

 

[StueyDuck]

Lol no I didn't. What a leap. It's simple logic, if 79% of the U.S. demo isnt say
.. straight white male, which is percieved to be impacted by DEI "negatively", yet the *majority* of the country is democratic, and also people of color or women..then listing that fact only reinforces that the majority of people dont share that "DEI is to blame" perspective. Purely on party demographics alone.


Lol I'm sure its more likely the average person isn't blaming bad video games on DEI, or even knows what sweet baby inc is. Lmao


mostly owning chuds? My first posts were about video games lol

the only person who brings white into this is you, or male or straight...

I mean of course you'd use your stealth account to make a few gaming posts initially, 60 posts in one year and the majority of them insinuating Gaf is racist and that they think other races are stupid.

it's not even subtle, I wouldn't think twice if I hadn't already seen 2 accounts exactly like yours get banned in the last week for doing exactly what you are doing. It's super fishy that all the accounts are just upwards of a year old and they all had approximately 60 posts. it's too coincendental for sure.

 

[StueyDuck]

Probably doing a test to enter the special club at resetera... must be their new form of evaluation for top members.

This and election year... he already mentioned musk some 30 times.. now "come november you will see" ...

Cant get more cartoonish than this.

yeah the November line for me was the giveaway, which is why I looked at the profile.

very clearly someone running a little campaign on Gaf with what seems to be multiple accounts.

I'll give it to them, it's pretty dedicated to layup all these accounts in advance for a whole year just to pull a stunt around November...

 

[ItJustWorks]

the only person who brings white into this is you, or male or straight...

I mean of course you'd use your stealth account to make a few gaming posts initially, 60 posts in one year and the majority of them insinuating Gaf is racist and that they think other races are stupid.

it's not even subtle, I wouldn't think twice if I hadn't already seen 2 accounts exactly like yours get banned in the last week for doing exactly what you are doing. It's super fishy that all the accounts are just upwards of a year old and they all had approximately 60 posts. it's too coincendental for sure.

Give me a break. We're disagreeing on DEI making a video game bad.

I remember when we used to be able to have debates and forum members didn't try to have their own forum for only particular perspectives, and kick out anyone who disagrees lol those were the days.

I'm not taking any of this personally...you guys though...

 

[StueyDuck]

Give me a break. We're disagreeing on DEI making a video game bad.

I remember when we used to be able to have debates and forum members didn't try to have their own forum for only particular perspectives, and kick out anyone who disagrees lol those were the days.

I'm not taking any of this personally...you guys though...

I didn't say anything in my message about DEI making a video game bad.

you are more than welcome to go and re read my original post.

mate you aren't fooling anyone, i don't think anyone is really taking your bait like you think they are, just calling out the hypocrisy.

 

[ItJustWorks]

yeah the November line for me was the giveaway, which is why I looked at the profile.

very clearly someone running a little campaign on Gaf with what seems to be multiple accounts.

I'll give it to them, it's pretty dedicated to layup all these accounts in advance for a whole year just to pull a stunt around November...

Right. We're resorting to conspiracy theories now. I see you guys want a monolithic ideologue perspective on this forum, no push back on anything. So I'll just call it quits. As the kids say
..."ya'll trippin". Byeeee

 

[StueyDuck]

Right. We're resorting to conspiracy theories now. I see you guys want a monolithic ideologue perspective on this forum, no push back on anything. So I'll just call it quits. As the kids say
..."ya'll trippin". Byeeee

hahaha yeah save the account quick before the powers at be catch on, don't wanna lose another one

 

[Woopah]

The ideology is the source it spawned from. If companies apply its tenets only partially, or only use its terminology, that still doesn't mean DEI itself is good. At best they're legitimizing it by paying lip service to it.

How do you decide what the tenets of DEI are, and that my company, CDPR and others aren't following them?

I'd argue DEI shouldn't even exist as a concept, and anyone who involves themselves with it has likely lost their way. The only letter within DEI that actually matters to a company is the I. Anyone should be able to apply, anyone should be able to be hired and everyone who works their should feel content. The D doesn't matter and the E has no place in the type of hierarchical structures that exist within companies.

Well humanity is naturally quite diverse. So if you get the I right, D will follow.

As for E, here's how BlackRock defines it:

"Everybody having fair access to opportunities to advance, succeed
and be their best, authentic selves."

You can have that in hierarchies
 

About "meritocracy versus DEI" this recent news settles the score once and for all. We have DEI wackos banning words. You can't get more Orwellian than that.

BBC boss says word ‘talent’ banned as workplace culture review begins

Tim Davie says corporation is committed to change after series of scandals including that surrounding Huw Edwards

www.theguardian.com

Quote:

BBC boss says word ‘talent’ banned as workplace culture review begins

Davie said no one at the corporation was “indispensable”. He told Robinson: “We often refer to people like yourself as talent, but I’ve kind of banned that. You’re a presenter, I’m a leader of the organisation, and we’re here to serve.

“I do think over the last decade or so we’ve seen fundamental changes in the culture in this industry, and it hasn’t been completely unique [to the BBC that] those that have had power in places can often use that in bad ways. I think the BBC is utterly committed – you see us acting in good faith to get at this [issue] – and I would say [it is] important that everyone is treated equally regardless of rank.”

He's saying you shouldn't use the word "talent" to refer purely to the highly paid people on screen. All the production staff and others are important too.

It's not "Orwellian" to say we shouldn't treat rich and famous employees better than everyone else.

 

[InterMusketeer]

How do you decide what the tenets of DEI are, and that my company, CDPR and others aren't following them?

We can just go to wikipedia and have a looksy:

Diversity refers to the presence of variety within the organizational workforce, such as in identity and identity politics. It includes gender, ethnicity, sexual orientation, disability, age, culture, class, religion, or opinion.

Notice how it says variety needs to be present. What matters is the end result, not efforts or goals. People who are not part of a minority identity will eventually be disadvantaged in some way to achieve "presence of variety."

Equity refers to concepts of fairness and justice, such as fair compensation and substantive equality. More specifically, equity usually also includes a focus on societal disparities and allocating resources and "decision making authority to groups that have historically been disadvantaged", and taking "into consideration a person's unique circumstances, adjusting treatment accordingly so that the end result is equal."

See how they're already dividing people into groups who will get less or more resources or authority based on identity? All with the grand goal of achieving an "equal end result." Equal according to whom? Disadvantaged according to whom? I'll let you answer those questions.

So the tenets of DEI (or rather the ideology it came from, DEI is more like a tool) are clear. They're facts, I don't decide them. As for how I can know if a company adheres to those tenets? All I can do is make an educated guess based on the info available to me.

 

[thegame983]

Well at least in a few weeks time we will know what Americans think of diversity hires.

 

[Bernardougf]

We can just go to wikipedia and have a looksy:

Notice how it says variety needs to be present. What matters is the end result, not efforts or goals. People who are not part of a minority identity will eventually be disadvantaged in some way to achieve "presence of variety."


See how they're already dividing people into groups who will get less or more resources or authority based on identity? All with the grand goal of achieving an "equal end result." Equal according to whom? Disadvantaged according to whom? I'll let you answer those questions.

So the tenets of DEI (or rather the ideology it came from, DEI is more like a tool) are clear. They're facts, I don't decide them. As for how I can know if a company adheres to those tenets? All I can do is make an educated guess based on the info available to me.

DEI politics are the same as Socialism ... people fall in love for the utopia idea and try to sell it as a beautiful reality if implemented right.. the problem is that the idea is flawed in the inception and its inevitable to fail.

The only DEI possible to work is simply common sense and decency... treat your fellow human right and thats it.