What bothers me most about elite colleges is that they're based on sheer amount of work, not actual ability.
Thus you get a lot of droids who are good memorizer/regurgitators but not necessarily all that wise, perceptive, creative, etc.
In my experience, schools discriminate against groups which they see as proxies for this group, such as doctor's kids, nerds, Asians, because having too many of them will mean a miserable "is this on the final?" campus with no commitment to learning.
"this method of sleuthing would be far less exciting for users, and would probably generate less traffic, than its current free-for-all approach."
When people do things for their own entertainment, they're always thoughtless.
When they do them out of deep conviction that they're contributing something positive, as in the open source movement, they are more effective.
Ironically, terribly and not-funny-at-all, the Boston bombers were working with the latter mindset. This enabled them to put a city on standstill and terrify a nation using bombs made from household items and black powder (normally considered too slow to be useful as a modern weapon).
"But how is that not discrimination masked in sheep's clothing?"
That's what it is. The inconsistency in the law has created a niche market, and people are taking advantage of it. That's why groups like "Women Who Code" exist; show up here to get a job.
If you're hiring someone because of their gender, race, etc., that's discriminatory.
However, you're also going to be judged by the statistics, which is to say, if you don't discriminate, you're going to be seen as discriminatory.
Someone write Congress and have them fix this please :)
As far as solutions, recognize that there's a reason most businesses like to hire people they know. They already know the people are capable and will fit in with the team, rather than "rolling the dice" with an unknown who might be perfectly competent but impossible to work with.
What that means is that you have a networking problem. You need to meet enough people so that if you decide to hire someone for a position, you immediately know some candidates. This means that some of them will be women.
I recommend going to the professors, campus organizations, or other authority figures that people already trust. This enables you to meet people without the somewhat creepy idea of showing up and trying to "recruit women" with some weird geek stunt.
Even better, consider your existing network: your employees. Have a dinner or drinks session where you encourage every employee to bring a friend "who might someday want to come on board."
I can't help you with the inherent paradox of being discriminatory in order to avoid being seen as discriminatory. But with more people on your mental rolodex, you'll have a better choice of finding someone who's a fit, and more of those will be women and other protected groups.
I think his point is that if we encourage that mentality and don't fight it on twitter etc, soon no accounts will be associated with the employers unofficially, and thus we won't get any of the news that leaks out that way. Our loss.
I don't think that fascism means what you think it means. The fascists I have argued with, and this does follow some excerpts from Mussolini's works and speeches, are subjectivists.
And yes, they do exist. They are actually a pest in certain forums. 4chan has a board which functions essentially as a ghetto for them and other miscellaneous right wingers, so that they won't be screwing up, say, the science or the sports boards with white supremacist spiel.
Sure, some opinions and politics are clearly subjective, however many others are clearly discrimination and bigotry. Anyone is free to spout their bigotry all they want, but I won't think any less of anyone who does not want to work for bigots or with them or even associate with them in any way. And I definitely won't blame any employeer who feels people like this reflect badly on their company and their culture.
I think it's not fascism to refuse to work with/for people whose polics are aimed at concretely restricting your civil liberties, in a way that might have affected your day-to-day life for the rest of your life.
I genuinely think that it's objectively correct that some minority must not be banned from being able to marry. I really don't think you can spin that into fascism.
To put it more drastically, just because someone dares to stand up to their oppressors, they are not immediately oppressing anyone themselves.
What if a CTO made a donation to a campaign to support fascism, this prospective employee was opposed to fascism, and cited this as the reason they would not work for said CTOs company.
Would you call that prospective employee a fascist?
I dislike your name and sense that we would probably disagree on most things. However, your statement about being able to work with others is true. One of the most important things I learned early in my career is that some people have horrible personalities but are really good at what they do. As long as personality conflicts aren't interfering with the purpose of getting business done, your beliefs and mine don't have to interact.
However, I think the most successful WordPress plugins are free, because most WordPress sites belong to dabblers. They are already paying for hosting; in their view, software should be free.
As leverage however, having a successful WordPress plugin can get your name out there, build up a ton of links to your URL, and get you contract gigs. People are making this work. I doubt you're going to make any money from the plugin alone however for the reasons you mentioned.
Or, find a volunteer group; they all need computer people.
Then expand your role to something that requires people interaction.
Otherwise, you'll get the mushroom treatment: they'll keep you in the dark and feed you cow feces.
Either way, you'll get to practice socializing, which is a skill like any other (think of it as learning to code recursively) and get to meet some new people, some of whom might become friends.
It could be that laws in general need to be more flexible, and to keep in mind the end goal more than the boundaries of strict limits in the language of the rules. That way, you don't have this one-or-the-other decision.
Thus you get a lot of droids who are good memorizer/regurgitators but not necessarily all that wise, perceptive, creative, etc.
In my experience, schools discriminate against groups which they see as proxies for this group, such as doctor's kids, nerds, Asians, because having too many of them will mean a miserable "is this on the final?" campus with no commitment to learning.