zlacker

>>tech-h+(OP)
There are two narratives:

1. These people are rabble-rousers who will never be happy and are disrupting the work environment at Google.

2. These people are highlighting legitimate problems within the company and are trying to enact positive change.

Take your pick. But be aware of both narratives. And be aware that neither of them is unreasonable.

>>leftyt+dn
1. is a bit presumptuous though if you’re going to jump to the conclusion that they’ll never be happy and that this would be a continuous issue after the enacted change that they were protesting for. It’s a rather baseless assumption if the only thing to go off of was an organized protest with well-defined ethical motivations. Unless there’s evidence of rabble rousing intention, it seems that 1. is unreasonable.

With that said, I have not followed this closely. For all I know, that evidence does exist and/or Google leadership has chosen not make said evidence publicly available.

>>nvrspy+4t
People who tend toward 1. would say that Google has bent over backwards to accomodate protesters and has acceded to their demands multiple times, e.g. canceling their project in China and dropping their contract with the US military.

Seems reasonable to me.