Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

A secret homophobe? Who said it was a secret? It's just as likely that it wasn't particularly secret.

If a homophobe was working for HR (in 2022) they would hide it, even to the extent of making sure to hire some percentage gays no matter what they thought personally.

> If your friend told you "man, my last customer was a jerk" you would distrust that?

My personal friend? That's the standard we're expecting from a giant corporation's bureaucracy? It just has its personal friends that it trusts.

That kind of thing is just gross, is my point. Maybe it's how everything works, welcome to the real world, etc. But it's nothing to be praised or admired.

The corporation should vet its "personal friends" at least as closely as its official HR personnel. Otherwise they're an unaccountable source of bias in the hiring process.



> That kind of thing is just gross, is my point.

Observing how people behave around nominal subordinates is not a new trick or one that is gross. It's an interesting data point. This is unusual as rather than a receptionist or security guard, it is someone who doesn't work for the company.

That you think it's impossible to trust someone without formal vetting is really interesting to me. It suggests that formal vetting by Big Corps is useful but knowing someone from a significant number of interactions/conversations is worthless. I don't buy into that at all, I'd argue pretty strongly the inverse is true and vetting is garbage and interpersonal interactions are useful.


Given how people are reacting, sounds like even telling the story is enough to make people out themselves

A similar way is to take the candidate out and see how they deal with the waiter.


It's not impossible to trust someone without formal vetting. It's irresponsible for a bureaucracy to trust someone without accountability.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: