[joshuamorton]

> Damore never argued for google to violate EEO laws, and in fact it’s the opposite.

While this may not have been his intent, this ruling appears to imply that the EEOC thinks that the content of his words do amount to that.

You can disagree, but my expectation is, being that they are EEOC lawyers and you are not, their understanding of what does or does not violate EEO law is better than yours.

[happyguy43]

I do disagree. This is on multiple thorough readings of his memo and a sound mind. He never advocates for Google to discriminate against anyone in his memo, nor does he advocate for Google to not prioritize diversity. There is no quote in his original memo to prove otherwise, legal opinion notwithstanding.

[joshuamorton]

And that's your right, my point is that the experts seem to disagree, and that should, at a minimum give you pause.

[happyguy43]

It did give me pause, then it gave me concern, then it fizzled into lack of surprise.

Damore lost the PR battle long ago. PR justice, while disheartening, isn’t anything new. Challengers to popular ideology are never right at first, but he’ll be right eventually. One day it’ll be more faux pas to assume there are zero average personality differences between the sexes.

[joshuamorton]

This is venturing off topic, but you're actually incorrect that he lost the PR battle [0]. The majority of people support Damore, or at least disagree with Google. The majority of subject matter experts, however, do not.

[0]: http://thehill.com/policy/technology/348246-poll-google-was-...