zlacker

One less person on the payroll to generate negative news and internal strife is surely a positive development.

>>fyovin+(OP)
Positive for Google & Shareholders, but not for the rest of the 7.7 billion people on Earth.

>>fyovin+(OP)
Imagine someone at Boeing would have generated some negative news about the MAX... I would think that smart people would admire people that speak against bad things like sexual harassment(which is illegal AFAIK) but I seems that we have people here that would prefer not see the dark sports of their favorite company.

I was reading the Amazon protest thread and it seems that the capitalists/free market guys would be fine with sexual harassment too because free markets would fix it and you have the choice to resign, too bad some communist made it illegal /s

>>fyovin+(OP)
A positive development for investors, sure. A negative development for anyone with a working moral compass.

>>fyovin+(OP)
We've banned this account for serially posting corporate propaganda for Google, which you've been doing on HN for years. Since banning dozens of your accounts hasn't convinced you to stop, I'm going to post about this increasingly loudly until you do stop. You should think about the many Google employees on HN, who overwhelmingly use this site in good faith. They represent Google the right way, by participating honestly in threads and commenting about what they know. They will cringe when they hear what you are doing—which if you keep doing it, they will. The agenda you've been propagating is a way to hurt Google, not help it.

We ask HN users every day not to accuse others of astroturfing or shillage, but the other side of the contract is that when we find real evidence of it, we crack down.

Edit: I should add, for those who are worried about bias, that we have nothing against Google and are only interested in protecting HN against abuse. People do that for other companies too, not just Google, and we're just as against it in those cases.