[P_I_Staker]

Admittedly didn't read the thin article. I do think there's something to the premise that people from diverse backgrounds end up unhappy.

Poorly run diversity efforts are upsetting to POC. In a way they all tend to be poorly run. It can be infantilizing and condescending.

Ultimately, we end up falling short of the numbers, so the people behind the programs are unhappy. POC are unhappy because of the quality of how the programs tend to be run. Obviously the fascists/republicans aren't happy. The centerist people tend to fall between the people running the program and the right.

So who's supposed to be happy. I will say that in my experience, these diversity programs don't exist. That is to say the really overbearing ones people complain about. I imagine it's a bigger thing for SV and some big companies (although, I have worked for big companies).

In my experience, programs are nearly non-existent and the minorities they hire are at least "pretty competent", which is hard to find in software. If anything, it looks like they're still being pretty choosy. So people like OP get their wish, and the programs are pretty laid back.

[ofcourseyoudo]

>Admittedly didn't read the thin article.

Why do people even proceed to put in comments after admitting this kind of ignorance on HN

[ottoflux]

for anyone else not able to get past the paywall:

from the article, only around 14% think DE&I efforts are "too much", while 54% say "about right", 17% "not sure", 15% "too little".

for thinking increasing DE&I at work is a good thing, only 47% of white people agreed while 78%, 72%, 65% (Black, Asian, Hispanic) thought so.