[_heimdall]

That's purely based on personal opinion though. I'm sure you could find people with the opposite opinion, that in a just world they would be able to go to work and do their job without having political debates forced on them.

Or alternately, one could easily say that in a just world a person would leave their when they disagree with the company rather than making a spectacle out of it.

[krainboltgreene]

You can find people who disagree with me about allowing mixed race couples, but it isn't meaningful to say that it's "purely based on personal opinion". You might as well also comment on how I used air to breath while writing it.

No one was stopped from going to work. There were no "political debates" going on, much less "forced" on people.

I swear you guys are just making stuff up to get mad at. I feel like there are real problems you could be worried about, like the people in Rafah. Instead I see a lot of chuffing about a gathering of noisy people. Whatever makes you feel good about your time on earth, I guess.

[_heimdall]

I had seen reports that there were people disrupting others trying to work in the office. I also expect that those protesting weren't talking about the weather, they would have been raising the issues they are there to protest.

Call it what you want I guess, but that is IMO stopping work and engaging in political debate.

I'm not sure why you reach for a straw man argument about air or mixed race couples, neither of those are relevant here at all and just make your argument weaker.

Edit: also to be clear, I'm not sure who the "you guys" you're referring to are and I'd rather not be lumped in with some larger group for my opinion on one specific situation. I'm also not looking to be angry about anything and am in no way angry about this. I can have opinions without it throwing my mood out of whack.

[bjourne]

Then cite those "reports". Otherwise you are just contributing to the misinformation.

[_heimdall]

Most articles circulating widely have included quotes from Google that the protesters that have been fired were physically disrupting those at work. I didn't expect that to be a contentious reference without a source, but sure here's one - https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/google-fires-more-worke...

To be clear, I'm well aware those are quotes from Google's PR department. I'm not taking them as true and was primarily building off other comments here. I think I covered that well by making sure I including "if true ..." caveats, not sure what else you'd want from me here other than to agree with you.

[bjourne]

"We continued our investigation into the physical disruption inside our buildings on April 16, looking at additional details provided by coworkers who were physically disrupted,"

So that is what Google, one party to the conflict, claims. Not something independent sources have verified. I'm pretty sure the protestors deny that anyone was "physically disrupted". Edit: You have updated your comments. My point is that it is unfair to default to believing Google and disbelieving the protestors.

[_heimdall]

The only update I made above was an explicit "Edit:" note a couple comments up, but that was before you commented here. I haven't changed any context or points I raised, in case that was a concern.

And again to be clear, I'm intentionally not trusting only Google and I called that out when I included a source (as requested). I don't think I've been misleading or unfair here, I'm not quite sure what you're taking issue with at this point.

[robertlagrant]

> I swear you guys are just making stuff up to get mad at. I feel like there are real problems you could be worried about, like the people in Rafah. Instead I see a lot of chuffing about a gathering of noisy people. Whatever makes you feel good about your time on earth, I guess.

This is a bit revealing. If you can't see anything but "us vs them" that's fine, but many people are a lot more objective and less trival than that. And that's why we'll win.

(Kidding about the last part. That's tribal lunacy.)