[Sacho]

I apologize in advance because you seem to be emotionally invested in this, but I really do not understand the questions you pose in your comment. What did you actually expect from the discussion? Were there not enough comments against Coinbase? Were there not enough comments outraged about the perceived racist behavior of it? Do you think none of those commenters "imagine the possibility that racism is a problem in America in 2020"?

Let's assume that I am 100% certain of all the accusations. How many types of comments do you expect to see about this? Condemn the company, point out systemic racism doesn't just affect Coinbase but everything, offer condolences and sympathy, support efforts to reduce racism. All of these comments exist in the thread.

What if I don't believe all the accusations are true? There are multitudes of reasons why that could be the case, which reflects in the number of possibilities being commented on. By your own contention, racism is a problem in America, so you would expect at least some of the comments to be racist, or at least controversial. You seem to have focused only on the worst ones, ignoring the discussions that followed them, whether positive or negative. You've ignored all the nuanced positions or straw-manned them. You're dismissive of people's comments or concerns while simultaneously asking people to not be dismissive of your concerns. I really don't get it.

[tptacek]

You appear to be arguing with the comment you wish that person had written, not they one they actually wrote. The actual comment is specific about the pattern of problematic comments they observed:

* They suggest that Black people are in general SJWs

* They attempt to litigate affirmative action rather than the claims in the article

* They argue that Black employees passed over for promotion were underqualified.

* They dismiss the entire article on the basis of it having appeared in the New York Times.

Take issues with any of these specific complaints if you want, but don't pretend that the comment simply said "there aren't enough anti-Coinbase comments here", because they didn't say that at at all.

[wolco2]

The message was I can't believe people made comments with the points above. Everyone should be on the page that racism exists specifically against black people in 2020.

I don't think the parent poster was pretending anything the parent-parent poster didn't share.

[adjkant]

> The message was I can't believe people made comments with the points above.

Again, where was that said? Disbelief is expressed nowhere in the post.

Even if that was the message, what in the world is the reply adding here?

The post is basically:

- points out the poster is emotionally invested in being discriminated against

- "well racism exists in 2020 idk what to tell you"

- You shouldn't expect people have any sort of productive discussion about the article

All of that is then followed by then saying they misrepresented everything. I'm not even directly tied to this in any way, and that made my blood boil a bit. The first line really sets the tone by leading with an apology, yet posting still. It ends in confusion while contributing nothing and basically saying "well the world is shit, expect it" but also trying to argue that all of this isn't shitty at the same time, tacitly adding to the racism. It's just incredibly unempathetic and doesn't really serve a purpose.

And yet, we have people now commenting in detail on the linguistic interpretation of the post to try and eke out some case for the response. What is this even for?

[Taek]

The response from Coinbase does not feel to me like one that would be presented by a company that is effectively seeking out and mitigating pockets of racism within the org.

The comments section on HN do not leave me feeling like racism is being given enough consideration within the community.

[chandra381]

> The comments section on HN do not leave me feeling like racism is being given enough consideration within the community.

Like it or not, there's an instinctive urge to deny that there are problems, and make it look like the victim is at fault for complaining. Nobody sits down and actually listens to what they have to say. Really disappointed by the HN community on this - and a bunch of big VCs - Jason Calacanis, Paul Graham, Balaji Srinivasan - who flocked to the defence of Coinbase after the memo pre-empting the story, but then were conveniently silent once the report actually came out.

I think this is a broader silicon valley problem - that oh, our companies are perfect! We can do no wrong. This applies to sexism, racism, any kind of -isms. It might also be illuminating reading to take a look at what HN commenters were saying about for example Susan Fowler's blog post (questioning her credentials, speculating that she was making false allegations) or even the Google protests about Andy Rubin's payout.

[Gibbon1]

> I think this is a broader silicon valley problem - that oh, our companies are perfect! We can do no wrong. This applies to sexism, racism, any kind of -isms.

Shorter: We can't be racist! All we care about is money.

[jayd16]

Talk about gas lighting. The commenter should just accept racism as a daily fact, not be surprised or saddened, and not even mention the sadness it brings? I find this pretty offensive.

[kaitai]

How 'bout comments talking about how to fix these problems proactively in other companies?

Why not do something useful instead of just waste minutes and photons?