[Jiro]

I think you basically answered your own objection. Probably 90% of convicted criminals are really criminals, and that's why people are suspicious of hiring them. The point of this project wasn't "get convicts hired because 10% of them are innocent", it was "get convicts hired because even though 90% of them are guilty, that's okay." It's called "70 million" because that's the total number of convicts, not an estimate of how many are innocent. And the founder himself is an ex-con, and he admits that he's actually guilty, and the crime he committed actually harmed people, it wasn't a corrupt prosecutor or a bogus drug law.

[mellavora]

Not sure where that 90/10 ratio comes from...

wondering what you know about how many cases are decided by plea bargain rather than trial, where the plea bargain is coerced rather than voluntary?

wondering also what your opinion is of felony drug convictions (for possession)? Technically a crime, but can you name the harm?

But more seriously wondering about your unwillingness to believe that people can change, and unwillingness to allow for redemption or forgiveness.

Which ultimately means you don't believe in justice. If society has decided that a certain crime has a penalty of 5 years in prison, then after 5 years the person has paid their debt to society. They are no longer a criminal, that debt is paid.

[Jiro]

>Not sure where that 90/10 ratio comes from...

From the previous poster.

>wondering also what your opinion is of felony drug convictions (for possession)?

I'd be fine with a project to get people convicted of felony drug or other nonviolent, victimless, crimes hired, and run by someone with such a conviction. This was not that project.

>But more seriously wondering about your unwillingness to believe that people can change,

It's a matter of the odds. People who have committed genuine crimes are greater risks. They can change, but we don't know that they've changed.

>They are no longer a criminal, that debt is paid.

Being rationally distrusted as a risk is a consequence of their crime, not a form of punishment; it's not done because of a desire to inflict suffering on the criminal, but to avoid harm.

>How have you changed your life based on the hurts you have caused others?

I've gone my life without committing a large scale financial fraud or similar act which hurt others to that degree.

[mellavora]

> And the founder himself is an ex-con, and he admits that he's actually guilty, and the crime he committed actually harmed people.

And the founder realized that his actions cause real harm, that hurting people is bad, and decided to dedicate his life to acts that did not hurt people.

He repented.

How have you changed your life based on the hurts you have caused others? Do you even admit that your actions have hurt others? Because I guarantee that you have caused pain, and harm.

I wonder if you know what true repentance is.