[HN Gopher] RedBalloon - free speech job board
___________________________________________________________________
RedBalloon - free speech job board
Author : cspliego
Score : 38 points
Date : 2021-09-23 18:02 UTC (4 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (redballoon.work)
(TXT) w3m dump (redballoon.work)
| MattyMc wrote:
| Yup this will attract the right people.
| Ekaros wrote:
| And probably keep away the wrong people. So win-win?
| willcipriano wrote:
| I imagine it's a sample size thing, but if this board is any
| indication of the market expect to make less than $20 a hour if
| you hold non majority opinions and want to publicly voice them.
| If represenative, it may be that the blue collar world is a lot
| more tolerant of dissenting opinions in a strange reversal of
| fortune from a few decades ago where it seemed the other way
| around.
| happytoexplain wrote:
| "Non majority opinion" is a hell of a loaded phrase.
| willcipriano wrote:
| Yeah, they could think covid probably came from a lab or that
| Hunter Bidens laptop was neither Russian in origin or
| misinformation.
| cool_dude85 wrote:
| Or maybe they're loud, public advocates for eliminating age
| of consent laws or bringing back chattel slavery.
| CrazyPyroLinux wrote:
| Or maybe they're strawmen!
| cool_dude85 wrote:
| Are you saying a company devoted to free speech would
| refuse to hire such people?
| CrazyPyroLinux wrote:
| Although I was originally thinking those aren't great
| examples because of their fringe nature (vs the more
| common mundane stuff that people can get cancelled over),
| that might make them good examples. Neither (by
| themselves) are illegal opinions (yet), so as long as
| they keep it out of the workplace it should not be part
| of the employment decision.
| imwillofficial wrote:
| You chose a poor example. Politico just independently
| verified some of the laptops contents.
|
| (Edit, I was taking things too seriously and completely
| missed the joke)
| SuoDuanDao wrote:
| That's the joke.
| [deleted]
| OrvalWintermute wrote:
| I prefer different terms for the same
|
| Authoritarian Consensus
|
| Decision by the Standing Committee
|
| Hivemind Policy
| SuoDuanDao wrote:
| "Latest word from the ministry of Truth"?
| riccardomc wrote:
| Is this a job board for conservative developers?
|
| It's becoming exhausting being a non-US netizen. It takes effort
| to constantly be vigilant and switch context and detect US
| political double speak.
|
| I am really not sure I am doing this right and I am tired...
| MrWiffles wrote:
| Can't blame you dude. I'm a US netizen and I'm exhausted with
| all this shit too. I'm just...too tired to care anymore.
| standardUser wrote:
| So if an employee has an active Twitter account where they
| regularly post overtly racist content, these are companies that
| will promise to keep them employed, regardless of, for example,
| complaints from other employees who are people of color?
|
| Sounds like a train wreck waiting to happen. Also, who wants to
| work for a company that is essentially reaching out to hire more
| racists?
| imwillofficial wrote:
| People like you are why that site exists. The endlessly
| increasing list called "racist" is getting tiresome for those
| who want to simply speak their truth.
| fxbe12 wrote:
| Word
| seanw444 wrote:
| Went to reply to the parent comment, and it got flagged.
| Jeez. Wasn't even advocating for racism. Hacker News is
| becoming tech nerd Twitter.
| dang wrote:
| Personal attacks are not allowed here, regardless of how
| wrong someone else is or you feel they are. Please review the
| rules and stick to them:
| https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.
|
| Edit: we've warned you many times about breaking the site
| guidelines and your recent comments have mostly
| (exclusively?) been flamebait and/or unsubstantive. If you
| continue like that we're going to have to ban you, so please
| fix this.
| throwaway894345 wrote:
| Why should we make every speech policy around the extreme
| fringe of content? Overtly racist content does happen too often
| including against white people in the BLM era--which _isn 't_
| to say that whites have it harder or any such thing--but why
| does that justify policies that restrict lots of _socially
| critical_ speech (e.g., challenging the factual basis for a
| given movement or citing research on the efficacy of nonviolent
| protest or publishing an interview with a Black man whose views
| defy media stereotypes [0])?
|
| [0]: https://nymag.com/intelligencer/amp/2020/06/case-for-
| liberal...
|
| I get that it's hard to craft precise moderation rules, but
| drafting policy based on the rare exception seems strictly
| harmful.
| Minor49er wrote:
| I doubt it will get that far. What's likely going to happen, if
| anything, is that companies will use this as a regular job
| board and will terminate problem employees as they already do.
| There doesn't seem to be any obvious way for employees to
| report a company. Further still, many of their job listings are
| with staffing agencies, which would only make it harder for
| RedBalloon to accomplish their goal since it adds a middleman
| between them and the employer.
| BizarroLand wrote:
| I looked through the jobs and they also pay pretty abysmally.
| $16/hr for a bookmaker on Oregon, $17/hr for CSAM in LA,$17
| for a warehouse worker in Washington.
|
| Most of these places have a minimum wage of $11-$15/hr, so
| they're paying pretty much nothing for hard labor tedious
| jobs.
| OrvalWintermute wrote:
| > post overtly racist content
|
| Define racist content, and what is not racist content.
|
| EDIT: I am serious, since Twitter mobs define it in a way that
| suits a political agenda, obviously, to "cancel" someone.
|
| EDIT PS: Bring the downvotes.
| throwaway894345 wrote:
| Not sure why this is downvoted. A popular refrain throughout
| the BLM years was "you can't be racist against whites" (and
| to a lesser extent "Asians and Jews are white-adjacent" with
| the heavy implication that it's okay to discriminate against
| them") which certainly suggests that a lot of people
| misunderstand "racism" (or if you prefer, they've overloaded
| the word with a new meaning and one which is literally
| racist, per the standard meaning).
| SuoDuanDao wrote:
| I believe filter bubbles have gotten so powerful that the
| English language is actually diverging as a result. The
| various meanings of 'racism' is one example, I call them
| neoracism and classical racism to distinguish.
| [deleted]
| SuoDuanDao wrote:
| Supporting free speech and being a racist are not the same
| thing. If implying they are ever becomes as taboo as overt
| racism is today, would you expect supporters of free speech to
| defend you?
| sofixa wrote:
| I think their point is that the people who complain about
| their free speech being stifled for being fired after a
| twitter or tiktok spat are usually, far more often than not,
| the type that berated young women for their swimwear or were
| spewing racist stuff.
| SuoDuanDao wrote:
| That's probably true, but I don't think it's relevant. An
| awful lot of us who don't find our own speech being stifled
| still don't want the free speech of others infringed
| either. I may not have anything dangerous to say today, but
| I should still defend my right to say something dangerous
| tomorrow.
| drcongo wrote:
| This site provides a very valuable service, with a list of
| companies to never ever deal with or work for.
| luxuryballs wrote:
| Heck this may be the better approach compared with tolerating
| only "one directional" racism or being vague about what is it
| isn't racism. Let people hash it out, let them learn and change
| over time, but if they are good at their job let them do it.
|
| It's already illegal to discriminate but should we really
| demand that everyone like each other too?
|
| Keep work out of politics not just politics out of work.
| kelnos wrote:
| Not wanting to hire people who are racist isn't being
| "political", it's just basic human respect for your employees
| who are targets of that racism.
| nitrogen wrote:
| What matters is what happens at work. I don't care how
| bizarre my coworkers' beliefs are, as long as work and non-
| work are compartmentalized. If you segregate people based
| on belief, then you amplify division and intolerance.
| kelnos wrote:
| Racist people don't magically become unbiased in the
| workplace. I would not inflict a racist manager on a
| direct report who would be the target of that racism.
| Even if the manager isn't overtly throwing around racist
| slurs, to it's vanishingly unlikely they'd set their
| biases aside when it comes to promotion time (for
| example).
|
| Your characterization of racism as a "belief" is
| alarming.
| nitrogen wrote:
| _Your characterization of racism as a "belief" is
| alarming._
|
| What word would you use for something someone believes is
| true, even if it isn't? I'm having a really hard time
| imagining what's wrong with the word "belief" here, to
| talk about the state of someone's mental expectations of
| the world.
|
| _Racist people don 't magically become unbiased in the
| workplace._
|
| People _can and do change,_ and most of them can
| compartmentalize in the mean time. "Racist" is not a
| fundamental, unchangeable attribute of a person, and it's
| too easy to scope creep once you've got the weapon of
| ostracism and censorship ready at hand. No matter how
| wrong they are, we can't just permanently deny people
| access to jobs and public life. That makes them martyrs.
| mikewhy wrote:
| > should we really demand that everyone like each other too
|
| Maybe not like each other, but acknowledging their coworkers
| right to exist should be required.
| felixgallo wrote:
| Every job board is a free speech job board. Maybe what you're
| looking for is a no consequences job board.
| maxehmookau wrote:
| Cool. A job board of companies I don't want to work for.
| BryantD wrote:
| Out of curiosity, would Coinbase be allowed to post jobs on this
| site? Their policy as I understand it is "no political
| discussions at work," which seems like it's not a free speech
| stance.
| jimbob45 wrote:
| "No political discussions at work" seems like it solves the
| problem right there. If anyone decides to break that rule, they
| can be reported immediately and if two people consent to
| breaking that rule (consent between each other), then the
| company doesn't have to get involved until one or the other
| reports the conversation at which point it's a simple write-up.
|
| That was always the policy in school growing up too. I really
| don't know why we ever strayed from that rule.
| seanw444 wrote:
| "Free speech until one reports the other."
|
| Mmmm, freedom.
| BryantD wrote:
| Well, that's a different proposed solution than why
| RedBalloon seems to be advocating. If I'm reading them
| correctly, they're saying that you should be able to say
| whatever you want at work.
|
| I'm interested in whether or not my interpretation is
| correct.
| jimbob45 wrote:
| Yeah I'm specifically talking about CoinBase's approach.
| You're right that RedBalloon would seem not to be in favor
| of the "No political discussion at work" policy.
| cool_dude85 wrote:
| Is it a free speech job board if the companies are going to
| fire me based on what I post on my twitter account? They say
| no cancel culture right on the front page.
| egypturnash wrote:
| Looks like a good place to check for companies to call for
| boycotts of. Just exercising my free speech, y'all.
|
| Though I suppose that's why "Anonymous Balloon" exists:
| https://redballoon.work/anonymous-balloon/
| bm3719 wrote:
| Glad to see this. If nothing else, it's worth it if you want to
| hedge against a certain kind of situation that we see articles
| about here every week.
|
| At this point in the culture war, I'd probably rather work for a
| small Christian company than some of the BigTech corps, all other
| things being equal. And I'm an atheist. Never thought I'd say
| something like that, but here we are.
| c0nsumer wrote:
| > We envision a world beyond cancel culture, where employees are
| free to work... without fear that they will find themselves on
| the wrong side of their employer's politics.
|
| > That's it. No agendas, politics, or drama. Just work.
| Interested? Let's create that world together.
|
| One of these things is not like the other...
| nitrogen wrote:
| There are, nonexclusively, three major things required for a
| democracy to function in a heterogenous society:
|
| - A secular, pluralistic public forum,
|
| - A professional respect for the opposition, and
|
| - The ability to disagree in one area without affecting other
| areas of a relationship.
|
| Right now this comment section is failing on all three, and
| proving why, despite whatever one's personal views are, job
| boards like this are necessary to prevent the destruction of the
| respectful opposition that allows democracy to thrive.
|
| Just remember, when clamoring for censorship and destroying
| someone's career because of their beliefs, that every weapon we
| create can be used against us.
|
| Turnabout is fair play, as they say. Today it's ostensibly truth
| beating hoax when the left is suppressing anti-scientific fringe
| views about pandemics or climate change, but yesterday it was
| also ostensibly truth beating lies when the right was suppressing
| gay rights, and tomorrow the pendulum can swing somewhere
| completely unexpected once again.
|
| So let's all be more tolerant of one another, because reasoned,
| respectful disagreement is the fundamental force that allows
| democracy to exist.
| [deleted]
| happytoexplain wrote:
| The implication that being explicitly anti-cancel-culture is an
| apolitical stance is somewhat amazing.
|
| This seems to be pretty obviously courting people with a
| particular political lean, not simply people who don't want to
| talk about politics.
| imwillofficial wrote:
| Those on the right and left are concerned with cancel culture.
| cool_dude85 wrote:
| That doesn't mean it's not a political stance.
| throwaway894345 wrote:
| Presumably the parent was rebutting this claim:
|
| > This seems to be pretty obviously courting people with a
| particular political lean
| mbesto wrote:
| 1) Cancel culture has always existed, it's just been branded
| in the last decade as a political wedge.
|
| 2) People (especially political pundits and libertarian
| minded tech people) have been crying for more free market
| principles to exist. Don't like Facebook is sharing your
| pictures? Good, stop using the service then. Is that the free
| market at work or is it cancel culture?
|
| 3) Whether an organization deems employees actions political
| or not doesn't matter - the only thing that matters is what
| the audience deems political. If an employee gets "canceled"
| and you refuse to fire the person resulting in an impact to
| your financials, you better have a good reason to tell your
| board why you suffered economic loss.
|
| I have first hand experience with cancel culture in the
| workplace. At a former company, we had an employee (one of
| ~60) who tweeted something critical about Trump during his
| presidency that was drug out into the spotlight (it got Fox
| News coverage) by Trump Jr. Our management team received
| scathing emails from clients and potential clients that said
| "fire this person or never work in this industry again" (mind
| you some of these came from billionaires and CxO's of Private
| Equity funds).
|
| When your revenue is on the line you don't have a choice in
| this matter. So, to the parent's point, pretending to take
| this stance isn't not be apolitical.
| nitrogen wrote:
| _Our management team received scathing emails from clients
| and potential clients that said "fire this person or never
| work in this industry again" (mind you some of these came
| from billionaires and CxO's of Private Equity funds)._
|
| Has anything like this reached the media, or is the media
| at similar risk? I'm sure some employment lawyers or
| journalists out there would love to know more about this
| kind of backroom pressure, whether right or left.
| mbesto wrote:
| > I'm sure some employment lawyers or journalists out
| there would love to know more about this kind of backroom
| pressure, whether right or left.
|
| Why on earth would I go to the media about <Insert PE
| Fund with $10B AUM that I don't want to name> when doing
| so would _definitely_ guarantee me not working in that
| industry again? Think about that for a second.
| nitrogen wrote:
| Not you personally, of course. But I would have thought
| that the risk of the rumors this kind of pressure being
| used as a weapon by competitors, if nothing else, would
| have come into play to minimize this type of undue
| influence.
| mbesto wrote:
| One of the reasons people buy products/goods is because
| of social proof - if that social proof erodes (i.e. one
| of my biggest clients cancels their revenue to me and
| tells everyone about it) then I have no control over what
| those clients' competitors say about me.
| throwaway894345 wrote:
| > Cancel culture has always existed, it's just been branded
| in the last decade as a political wedge.
|
| To be clear "canceling" in the sense of "cancel culture"
| was coined _by the cancelers_. It 's not a conspiracy "to
| drive a political wedge", but a description using the
| movement's own jargon.
|
| As far as "it has always existed", I don't think that's
| true. Certainly campaigns of targeted harassment have
| always existed (which is to say "canceling" has always
| existed), but the culture where this kind of behavior is
| normalized and valued is relatively novel. Like any kind of
| social ill, if you rewind far enough you can find a time
| when it was common, but at least in my lifetime it was
| never normal or valued.
|
| The canonical exception which proves the rule was the Dixie
| Chicks' cancellation as a result of their criticism of the
| war, and even then to get that kind of a response, the
| Dixie Chicks had to say something which offended a
| supermajority of Americans, while "cancel culture" today is
| typically about offending a small minority (roughly 10%).
|
| > When your revenue is on the line you don't have a choice
| in this matter. So, to the parent's point, pretending to
| take this stance isn't not be apolitical.
|
| Like everything, opposition to cancel culture is political
| for a sufficiently broad definition of "political". Maybe
| the more interesting question is whether it's _partisan_ ,
| and I think your anecdote proves that it's not. There are
| elements of the left and the right for whom "cancel
| culture" is an apt description. Similarly, there are folks
| on all sides who oppose cancel culture.
| mbesto wrote:
| > As far as "it has always existed", I don't think that's
| true.
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boycott
|
| > Like any kind of social ill, if you rewind far enough
| you can find a time when it was common, but at least in
| my lifetime it was never normal or valued.
|
| Keep in mind social media has drastically amplified the
| attention we point on cancel culture. Both the
| "cancelling" itself but as well as people talking about
| it. Perhaps that has also increased the amount of events
| happening, but it doesn't mean it hasn't existed (see
| Boycotting above).
|
| > Like everything, opposition to cancel culture is
| political for a sufficiently broad definition of
| "political".
|
| You have to be able to define what cancel culture is
| first. As my little story pointed out, there is nothing I
| can do as a business to recourse clients not buying my
| product as a result of an employee getting "canceled".
|
| > Maybe the more interesting question is whether it's
| partisan
|
| Maybe, but trying to assign a political party to the use
| of its weaponry you're only further creating a divide and
| therefore creating partisan. In other words, if you
| conclude that the left/right they're using cancel culture
| they'll only dig their heals in more and project that the
| opposite side is weaponizing it.
|
| > Similarly, there are folks on all sides who oppose
| cancel culture.
|
| Ultimately the fact that there isn't a commonly accepted
| definition regardless of political affiliation is what
| holds us back from either eliminating it or accepting it
| as simply free market principles.
| throwaway894345 wrote:
| Which lean? Most of the "anti-cancel-culture" people I follow
| (myself included) are left of center, and traditionally free
| speech values were a liberal issue. The insinuation that "free
| speech" is exclusively a right wing value is nothing more than
| a figment of authoritarian rhetoric.
| zestyping wrote:
| I don't even understand what they are doing here. Do they vet
| companies? Is there anything about this job board that actually
| promotes free speech, or is it just another job board with some
| branding?
| bitwize wrote:
| "Free speech" is dogwhistle for fash. Americans haven't yet
| understood something that Europeans have practically
| internalized: when it comes to speech, the privileged are
| inherently much louder than the marginalized; therefore, greater
| restriction of their speech is legitimate. The conceptualization
| of the First Amendment that orevails today ever since
| _Brandenburg v. Ohio_ in 1969 basically gives license to the
| right to foment hate.
|
| And so here we are: a job board to help the far right dodge
| consequences for their hate speech.
| nacho2sweet wrote:
| $16/hr for a skilled trade welder position at a company that
| posts on this website? You Americans need a $15 minimum wage lol.
| nitrogen wrote:
| You can live on that just fine in many rural areas, where a lot
| of welding jobs might be found.
| kube-system wrote:
| Well, it is Montana, it includes medical and dental insurance
| at 100% employee and 75% for dependents. The total comp is
| probably more comparable to other $22-25/hr jobs with minimal
| benefits for someone with a family.
| woodruffw wrote:
| Bum pay and racist coworkers are as American as baseball and
| apple pie!
| throwaway894345 wrote:
| Surely you're aware that the median wage in the United States
| is higher and racism lower than virtually anywhere else in
| the world, right?
| woodruffw wrote:
| Tens of millions of people in the United States live below
| the median wage, by definition. It's a nonsense statistic
| in the context of a remark on any _particular_ low-paying
| job, of which there seem to be plenty on this site.
|
| I don't know you (or anyone else) would evaluate racism
| being "lower" in the US. It also occurs to me that lower
| isn't the same thing as low, and that I don't have to fix
| other exceptionally racist countries before I remark about
| racism in my own.
| throwaway894345 wrote:
| > Tens of millions of people in the United States live
| below the median wage, by definition.
|
| Right, but that's precisely the point--the same is true
| _everywhere_ ( "median" doesn't work differently when
| applied to Europe or Asia! (: ).
|
| > It's a nonsense statistic in the context of a remark on
| any particular low-paying job, of which there seem to be
| plenty on this site.
|
| You remarked that low paying jobs were quintessentially
| American. If that's the case, we would expect some
| majority of Americans to hold low-paying jobs when in
| fact the median American pay is quite high relative to
| other regions of the world.
|
| > I don't know you (or anyone else) would evaluate racism
| being "lower" in the US. It also occurs to me that lower
| isn't the same thing as low, and that I don't have to fix
| other exceptionally racist countries before I remark
| about racism in my own.
|
| I think you're being unduly defensive here. No one is
| saying you have to fix any other place before remarking
| about racism in your own country. I _am_ saying that your
| heavy implication that the US has unusually high levels
| of racism seems factually incorrect. By all means, we can
| criticize our country, but let 's strive to be factual.
| throwaway894345 wrote:
| Contrary to the media depiction in your country, the United
| States is a bit bigger than New York and California, and many
| of those mysterious places in between are pretty affordable.
| mikewhy wrote:
| Doesn't change the fact that the US' minimum wage is
| incredibly low and has been for years.
| throwaway894345 wrote:
| That wasn't the original claim, and anyway I'm skeptical.
| Certainly the US minimum wage is _very high_ if we look at
| it naively (in most of the world $13.50 /hr is a whole lot
| of money, especially considering the significantly improved
| worker protections). You'd need to account for purchasing
| power and cost of living, and I don't have the data handy.
|
| But it hardly matters, we can campaign for a higher minimum
| wage without arguing that the US is a terrible place. And
| I'll go a bit further--not only is the wild hyperbole
| unnecessary, it's actively harmful to the campaign for a
| higher minimum wage because people associate the issue with
| liars.
| eigengrau5150 wrote:
| Unless you go and get yourself indicted for a crime, what you do
| outside the workplace should be none of your employer's business.
| Even if your biggest hobby is shitposting on Twitter and getting
| other people butthurt because somebody was mean to them on the
| internet.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-09-23 23:02 UTC)