SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Google workers fired amid organization efforts file retaliation complaint:
Four former employees who say Google fired them in retaliation for their efforts to organize co-workers are planning legal action against the company. The workers allege the tech giant violated US labor law.
[...] The employees continued:
It's clear that [Google's] draconian, pernicious, and unlawful conduct isn't about us. It's about trying to stop all workplace organizing. Google wants to send a message to everyone: if you dare to engage in protected labor organizing, you will be punished. They count on the fear, the sadness, and the anger that we are all feeling to stop us all from exercising our rights, and to chill all attempts to hold one of the most powerful organizations in history accountable for its actions.
[...] Google denies that the employees were fired in retaliation for any organizing activity. "We dismissed four individuals who were engaged in intentional and often repeated violations of our longstanding data security policies, including systematically accessing and disseminating other employees' materials and work," a company spokesperson said in a statement. "No one has been dismissed for raising concerns or debating the company's activities."
Previously:
Google Fires Four Staffers After Protest, Accusing Them of Data Security Breaches
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 04 2019, @03:24AM (15 children)
Workers should be able to do a class-action lawsuit when the employer misbehaves. There should be no possible way to waive this right.
Companies should be able to fire people for union activity. Unions are corrupt labour monopolies that extract a private tax from the employee-employer relationship. They insert themselves into the middle to enrich themselves, and they bribe our politicians to keep it legal. Really we should be prosecuting union activity.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by barbara hudson on Wednesday December 04 2019, @03:33AM (14 children)
Here, let me fix that for you:
Everything you said about unions is true in spades about companies. If it weren't for unions, we'd still have 72-hour 6-day workweeks, no minimum wage, and if you got hurt or killed on the job that's your problem, Jack. Same if they decide to change your wages retroactively. Or fire you if you don't buy everything from the company store, or use another competitor's products.
Company retirement plan? Your company retirement plan is to die before you reach the age of retirement.
SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
(Score: 0, Flamebait) by khallow on Wednesday December 04 2019, @04:02AM (3 children)
Like what? "They insert themselves into the middle" is bogus since there's no one on the other side of employers for which they can be made a middle man.
Except, of course, the companies ran out of people willing to work those hours for those wages. What keeps getting missed here is that labor pricing power came first. And when labor started competing with cheaper labor from the developing world, the situation went a bit the other way.
Why should the company be responsible for your goals?
(Score: 2) by hendrikboom on Wednesday December 04 2019, @04:26AM (2 children)
Company retirement plans often go belly-up when the company goes bankrupt.
(Score: 2) by VLM on Wednesday December 04 2019, @12:52PM
Now in all fairness company pension plans started disappearing in my grandparents generation and I'm not that young anymore. Its down to about 13% and historically has been dropping at least ten percent a decade so by 2030 there will be roughly no employees covered by pensions anymore in the USA.
It's all 401Ks and IRAs owning various mutual funds for some decades now. My rolled over Fidelity IRA from some place I worked at a quarter cenutry ago really doesn't care if my former employer goes bankrupt...
The good news about "modern" post 1980 retirement plans is I don't have to invest 100% of my retirement in my individual poorly run employer. The bad news is, whenever you give people freedom, you'll have idiots "actively" investing in really awful ideas, see the dotcom era, etc. Overall, we're probably better off with the modern system.
Note that only a minority of Americans have retirement accounts / plans at all, in that way the whole topic is rather abstract. The majority of Americans don't have to worry about retirement. Life gets pretty socialist over age 65, and there's entire industries focused on extracting all your wealth as soon as possible after 65 so we all end up on govt services before we die. If you live beneath your means now, all you're doing is funding some hospital manager's bonus when you're elderly, its not like you're going to be permitted to actually enjoy that saved money, LOL.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Wednesday December 04 2019, @03:05PM
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 04 2019, @06:04AM (5 children)
Really hate line quoting, but I think it's appropriate here. This is completely misinformed.
Both the minimum wage and 40 hour work week were instituted initially not by unions or by governments, but by Henry Ford. [thevintagenews.com] And it wasn't driven by concern for the workers, but concern for profit. There's a much better article that I can't currently locate which got into the nitty gritty details, though this one is better in that it provides some neat vintage footage. In particular Ford, and other companies were facing extremely high turn over rates. Due to this, Ford ended up hiring a substantially larger chunk of workers than was actually needed for operations, just to be able to handle the expected turn-over without any significant hiccups in production.
Eventually this culminated in him experimenting with increasing incentives. It paid rich dividends. His productivity after swapping to a 40 hour work week increased. Similarly for increasing wages. Afterwards he tried to reframe his decisions as being due to a social conscious, but it was no doubt driven in large part by profit. And this led to other companies mimicking his decision to reap similar benefit.
---
Something people forget is that we still have no minimum wage. People who don't have a job earn $0. As we've constantly strove to improve labor conditions, wages, and increased rules and regulations companies have largely responded by simply moving much of the manufacturing offshores to countries where such rules don't exist. They end up producing their products for much cheaper, and then come back and sell them for as much as it would have cost to produce them stateside. As a fun example, the iPhone Max Pro cost about $490 [msn.com] to produce, that's then sold in the US for $1100.
Should conditions for skilled labor become more onerous than it's worth for US companies, then expect to see the exact same thing happen to skilled labor as well. In this case it's fairly absurd. What are they even organizing for? I rather hate Google with a passion but I'd be the first to acknowledge they treat their employees phenomenally well, and pay them phenomenally well. It's part of the kool-aid that keeps people not only working but actively evangelizing for an awful company, effectively working as free astroturfed PR.
(Score: 2) by barbara hudson on Wednesday December 04 2019, @10:35AM (2 children)
So the beginning of the Industrial Age, with child labour and 12-hour work days, can be hand-waved away because someone in a later century saw the competitive advantage of paying more so his employees could buy his products? I don't think so. It hasn't stopped labour abuse. Crunch time is stupid , but poor management who can't plan properly still rely on it, often without compensation. Management says "just be happy you have a job", and tech workers without unions don't have the guts to say "without us YOU don't have a job." Management doesn't want unions because it puts financial pressure on them to get rid of bad management that causes labour disruptions for no good reason.
SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
(Score: 0, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 04 2019, @11:17AM
What you've done here is a textbook example of no less than two argumentative or logical fallacies:
- Shifting the Goalposts [wikipedia.org]
- Straw Manning [wikipedia.org]
Have you ever wondered why you rarely convince anybody of anything unless they already agreed with you to begin with? It's because you're not arguing in good faith. And people may not point this out, but I suspect most are cognizant of it - even if they might know the proper terms of precise reasons for what they are observing feeling 'off.' You stated:
This is, provably, a false statement. You're now instead claiming I said something I did not, while also simultaneously changing your own claims. That is childish and a strong indicator that you're not interested in actually discussing an issue in good faith or engaging in any meaningful way - but rather trying to spew out as many bullet points as you can and just hoping something sticks.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 04 2019, @08:56PM
Of course we had child labour and 12-hour work days. By modern standards, we were really really poor. GDP was practically nothing.
We'd do it again if we were poor again. When the entire economy is small, the government can't save you. There isn't much to tax. Subsistence farming looks reasonable. If kids don't work, kids starve.
Laws will be disobeyed if starvation is the alternative. Think children don't work in Africa, Bangladesh, Papua New Guinea, or Burma? That'll be America too if something like nuclear war or the Green New Deal collapses our economy.
(Score: 3, Informative) by DeathMonkey on Wednesday December 04 2019, @06:14PM (1 child)
A few quotes from your link:
Ford was first, and gave it to Ford employees. Unions gave it to everybody else.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 05 2019, @06:39AM
And the lines you chose to exclude:
Ford's new way was becoming normalized among intelligent companies decades before any government involvement. And was the regulation a good thing there? Assuming Ford is correct, and by all accounts he was, then GM was killing themselves and would have eventually died being unable to effectively compete. Indeed there's a very real chance we might not even know the name GM today! But the government forced the company to do something that was probably in its own best interest. And so a scummy company was able to continue after being literally forced into the right direction.
I think this has parallels to the bank bailouts. We bailed out the banks and the banks are, shockingly, now trending towards just as scummy behavior that will, once again, likely eventually result in a collapse. The solution is not to then bail them out once again, but let bad companies do bad things - and let them die for it. Regulations instead subsidize and idiots and bad actors. And indeed over time it's starting to seem that that's all we have left, but there's a very good reason for this. If you were a responsible bank engaging in judicious and careful management of funds and only leveraging in completely appropriate scenarios then you simply were going to make a whole lot less money than the banks that decided to rock out with their cock's out as it relates to the money of their clients. Of course the catch is that those more aggressive banks would eventually go tits up, but they didn't - because we saved them. And now, don't save them with regulations either. Let them kill themselves, and don't resuscitate them and, in the end, you'll only be left with the people who are decent.
(Score: 2) by VLM on Wednesday December 04 2019, @01:02PM (3 children)
We have that now, and the only reason its not more popular is CONTRACTORS not unions. Thank God for CONTRACTORS. Managers would have insane demands for their feudal serf property (aka employees) if it were not for harsh hourly rates for contractors.
If every "IT" worker were a contractor, similar to how plumbers or electricians work, we wouldn't have this kinda mess.
If you think about it, some rando insurance company or warehouse site hiring full time computer repairers is about as weird as the idea of them hiring full time plumbing repairers or full time roof repairers. Just contract all that commodity labor out... I think full time IT employees will eventually disappear. There will still be an "IT department" with project managers doing budgets and riding herd over a sea of contractors, but the idea of a non-IT company having a full time employee to occasionally install network cabling would be as weird as hiring a permanent full time employee to install a new HVAC system.
(Score: 2) by dry on Wednesday December 04 2019, @05:02PM (2 children)
I was under the impression that most plumbers and electricians are employees. Sure their employers might be contractors who take construction contracts etc but that isn't the same as the self-employed contractor.
(Score: 2) by VLM on Friday December 06 2019, @12:33PM (1 child)
I'm not sure; there are probably more apprentices working for masters, I guess?
The argument interestingly doesn't matter too much.
The problem with employer/employee relationships seems to be the giant and wealthy employer having an infinitely higher negotiation power than the individual employee. And if the company doesn't have any reason to care about the welfare of some abstract employee, the employee gets F-d over pretty bad.
One solution is to have the employer negotiate with a huge entity with massive negotiation power. The problem with the union is technically it has no carrot only a stick and no deliverables. The advantage of Joe6Pack Plumbing LLC is he's got skin in the game to actually accomplish something productive in the contract WHILE his only employees (the apprentices and journeymen or whatever) are the product he's selling so he's highly motivated not to F them over. A plumbing company that Fs over plumbers isn't going to be plumbing for long; a coal mine or warehouse that Fs over plumbers... well... plumbing isn't its main line of business so its not gonna matter.
Look at it this way; if you work IT as a "cost center" you're gonna get screwed over, like if you work for a company directly. If you work IT doing EXACTLY the same thing as a "revenue center" for a contracting company you'll get VASTLY better treatment.
Note the inefficiencies of the contractor model balance out with the economies of scale. Yes the company has to "waste time" writing a written spec of work before working, although everyone knows that saves money in the long run... On the other hand the contractor does this labor all day long and has massive economies of scale and experience.
As an employee I could technically be forced verbally to come in at 2am and terminate some ethernet cables. I've done a couple hundred over the last few decades so I could certainly do it if I had to, but never did it at 2am while asleep and I don't trust my memory of color codes so it's gonna take a lot of extra labor and lower quality and without written goals who knows if I'll make the boss happy. Frankly its just cheaper to have a professional cable puller terminate and test that cable, even if you have to pay 2am emergency overtime.
Likewise I COULD be ordered as an employee to come in and replace an office toilet on unpaid overtime tonight. I've never actually done a high pressure commercial toilet, but just like IT/programming stuff thats what google and youtube are for, LOL. Anyone mechanically inclined, strong enough, and crazy enough to try it, could replace an office toilet... probably... But lets face reality its a much more sensible business decision to have a plumber come in on a simple contract to replace that toilet.
Swapping backup tapes and pulling cables and replacing PC mice is the toilet replacing of the IT world, and writing code and devops scripts is the framing carpentry of the IT world... its just all gonna be service contracts sooner or later, with MUCH better quality of living.
I will admit there are fields where quality of life is pure crap like AAA game programming with insane deadlines. Of course thats voluntary; if a plumber hates toilet replacements and intentionally takes a job at a toilet replacement contractor... well... what did he expect? If you hate patching windows servers don't take a contracting job at a MCSE farm, LOL. Hate Java? Then get a job at the Clojure hippie office, not the Java office.
(Score: 2) by dry on Saturday December 07 2019, @01:37AM
OK, I agree 100%. Thanks for clearly stating what you meant.
(Score: 3, Informative) by barbara hudson on Wednesday December 04 2019, @03:45AM (34 children)
Ars omitted to mention that 3 of the 4 fired employees are lgbt [theguardian.com]
Once again it's lgbt folks standing up for everyone's rights, but you wouldn't know it from ars.
SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 04 2019, @03:49AM (7 children)
0) Backup regularly
1) Backup those backups
2) Expect Google to wipe your stuff if it suits them.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by barbara hudson on Wednesday December 04 2019, @03:59AM
This smells of retaliation. For a company that claims to have advanced data and telecommunications capabilities, making a backup of her personal stuff and returning it to her should have been easy-peasey.
Reminds me of Microsoft's "Where do you want your files to go today" problems. If they had wiped their company computers and said "I just wanted to make sure I left no personal data behind" they'd be facing criminal charges.
SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by MostCynical on Wednesday December 04 2019, @06:39AM (5 children)
3) don't use a work phone for personal storage
"I guess once you start doubting, there's no end to it." -Batou, Ghost in the Shell: Stand Alone Complex
(Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 04 2019, @07:26AM (4 children)
(Score: 2, Insightful) by MostCynical on Wednesday December 04 2019, @07:55AM (2 children)
Google collaboration or vpn or other apps installed? ToS and conditions of use (and likley employment) mean she made it a work device, and gave them permission to wipe the phone.
If your employer can access it, it isn't yours.
"I guess once you start doubting, there's no end to it." -Batou, Ghost in the Shell: Stand Alone Complex
(Score: 2) by barbara hudson on Wednesday December 04 2019, @09:45AM (1 child)
If you use your car for work and receive a mileage allowance that doesn't mean that they can take whatever they want out of your car when you stop working for them. Same applies to a company car - they have to return your private property intact.
It's pretty much impossible to believe that they don't have backups if they had installed software to do remote administration on her phone. This was revenge.
SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Oakenshield on Wednesday December 04 2019, @02:38PM
Added for emphasis. This is most likely the case. When I had to grant permission to my employer to wipe my phone remotely in order to connect to the Exchange server, I declined. They can provide me a phone if they want me to access email and calendars on my phone.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by darkfeline on Wednesday December 04 2019, @12:34PM
At least on Android, if you set up a work profile properly, it's not possible for your company to wipe your phone. The personal and work profiles on the phone are sandboxed, and the admins can only wipe the work portion.
It sounds like this stupid person installed the corporate admin on her personal profile, giving the admins access to the entire phone. So yes, the company has the right to wipe everything, including any "personal" data intermixed with the work data.
There's a tradeoff here: use sandbox on phone for work, admins can wipe sandbox, but you only have limited access (because the admins cannot wipe/control/trust the entire physical device), or use the entire phone for work, but the admins can wipe everything.
Really, if all your personal data is on a corporate IT controlled device, you shouldn't be digging through unrelated docs and coworkers calendars, you're just asking for trouble.
Join the SDF Public Access UNIX System today!
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 04 2019, @06:28AM (15 children)
Which rights exactly? All of the things in the quoted block are no longer relevant following the Supreme Court gay marriage ruling.
"Google is a lovely place to work if you are transgender and don’t care about what is going on in the world"
translates more accurately to
"Google is a lovely place to work as long as you don't start dragging your politics into the office."
(Score: 3, Funny) by barbara hudson on Wednesday December 04 2019, @09:56AM (13 children)
And I probably missed a bunch more, like the handicapped, homeless, people with addictions, the mentally ill, those without medical coverage or huge copays and other readers can add to the list.
SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 04 2019, @11:09AM (2 children)
That has nothing to do with my question. You stated,
I'm simply asking you to enumerate some of these rights instead of making vague and mostly unfalsifiable assertions.
(Score: 2) by DeathMonkey on Wednesday December 04 2019, @09:13PM (1 child)
The rights are enumerated in the Fair Labor Standards Act [dol.gov] as enforced by the National Labor Relations Board. [nlrb.gov]
NRLB - Rights we Protect - Your Rights during Union Organizing [nlrb.gov]
NRLB - Rights we Protect - Discriminating against employees because of their union activities or sympathies (Section 8(a)(3)) [nlrb.gov]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 05 2019, @11:26AM
That is not standing up for anybody's rights, that is exercising your own.
If somebody runs around calling everybody a nasty word, one might suggest he's exercising his first amendment right. Of course his exercising said right has absolutely zilch to do with protecting any of mine.
(Score: 2, Redundant) by EEMac on Wednesday December 04 2019, @03:48PM (4 children)
In the U.S., LGB have achieved equality. Gay marriage is legal everywhere. Gay people are in almost every TV show and/or movie, even when it doesn't make sense. (See: It Chapter 2.) Sure, there are people who still don't like gays, but there are people who don't like you no matter who you are. That's not down to a lack of equality.
(Score: 2, Informative) by DeathMonkey on Wednesday December 04 2019, @09:16PM (1 child)
Half of LGBTQ adults live in states where no laws ban job discrimination [usatoday.com]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 05 2019, @08:11AM
Where are the laws that ban discrimination against individuals for being straight? This isn't simply a rhetorical device. For there to be inequality, there needs to be inequality. Asking for treatment that does not apply to another group is not asking for inequality, it's asking for superiority. It's also not merely hypothetical. For instance, do you think Google has more or less LGTB, than the national average? If you don't know - it's way way way more. So, should they justly be able to be sued for engaging in what clearly must be discrimination against heterosexuals?
(Score: 2) by DeathMonkey on Wednesday December 04 2019, @10:02PM (1 child)
Same-Sex Couples Don't get the Same Marriage Benefits as Heterosexuals in Texas [newsweek.com]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 05 2019, @08:29AM
Do you know why political leaders, religions, and practically every group throughout history has given strong endorsements towards heterosexual bonding? It's because these bonds produce children. These children then become the future. Without them, society collapses in quite rapid order. We can even see this in the world today as liberalism, due to increasing activism against fertility, is literally killing itself. The future will largely be determined by highly religious, conservative low education, low income, families. Thanks, "leftists." Put only in quotes since I am, sometimes feeling "was", very much a liberal but I have no clue what has happened to liberalism in the west today. So hence liberal vs leftist. I do not see them as the same thing.
The point of this is that there was always an rather direct quid quo pro in marriage incentives. State gives you things, you give them babies. Homosexual relationships, in general, do not involve natural fertility. And studies also need to be carried out to determine the psychological and generally mental health of children raised in homosexual households. The long and short of this is that homosexual relationships are giving less to society, but expecting just as much in return. This is illogical.
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 04 2019, @09:04PM (1 child)
This is Google we're talking about, so...
republicans, conservatives, Trump supporters, Christians, white people, males, non-LGBT
All are discriminated against by Google, in numerous ways. For example, where is the special internship program for any of the above?
(Score: 2) by FatPhil on Wednesday December 04 2019, @09:57PM
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 3, Informative) by c0lo on Thursday December 05 2019, @04:08AM
Some guys [youtube.com] (see the description for credits) got a list of words [google.com] that will get your youtube vid demonetized
LGBT specific terms are among them.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 05 2019, @07:29PM (1 child)
No, women won't have achieved equality till either selective service is disbanded permanently or women are also required to register and equally likely to be drafted later.
(Score: 2) by barbara hudson on Thursday December 05 2019, @07:49PM
Trans-men aren't welcome in the US military as per Trump. Neither are trans-women, despite many of them having served with distinction (eg Navy Seal).
Selective Service is bullshit through and through. Rich white folk get deferments. Ask Trump about his totally bogus bone spur. Didn't stop him from playing tennis or golf.
It's also not needed. The government already has enough data on those who are disabled, or outside the required ages, to serve.
Selective Service has proven to be racist.
SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
(Score: 2) by DeathMonkey on Wednesday December 04 2019, @09:57PM
I guess you missed the part in the quoted block where gay married couples get fewer benefits than straight married couples. Such equality!
(Score: 1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 04 2019, @09:53AM (4 children)
LGBT troublemakers should have staid in the closet. Google did the right thing for once by not rolling out the red carpet.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by barbara hudson on Wednesday December 04 2019, @10:11AM (2 children)
You wish. We're the genie that's been let out of the bottle. We're going to keep pushing for everyone's rights, even those who don't know the difference between "staid" and "stayed. Because being treated fairly is a human right, not something to keep on whittling away at.
Ain't no going back into the closet for us. There's not enough trans-misogyny in the world going to make that happen, because shame is the cudgel that's been used against me and everyone else who's LGBT, and we have nothing to be ashamed of for being ourselves.
I understand that change is scary, but all growth requires change. You'll be happier in the long run if you just embrace diversity and the benefits it brings, rather than the risks of a monoculture that isn't as resistant to disasters. Ask any geneticist. Monoculture bad. Diversity good.
SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 04 2019, @04:03PM (1 child)
LOL! I had to read AC's comment several times before figuring out AC meant 'stayed' instead of 'staid'. It made no sense as written, as I DO know the difference of 'staid' and 'stayed'.
An applause worthy reply, 'Barbara hudson (6443).
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 05 2019, @02:09AM
Wow, you people are too easy.
(Score: 2) by FatPhil on Wednesday December 04 2019, @03:43PM
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: -1, Troll) by VLM on Wednesday December 04 2019, @12:41PM (4 children)
Its an interesting battle where usually Google is very leftist, so that 75% is probably representative of Google employees in general and leftists including leftist companies are always above the law, but when there's an internal family struggle, then where does a far left wing company stack up vs individual acknowledged winners of the Oppression Olympics? Doesn't Google the company have internal policies to hate and work against Trump enough to outweigh they oppressed a small handful of diverse employees?
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Azuma Hazuki on Wednesday December 04 2019, @02:57PM (1 child)
Greed transcends politics. Google is about money, not people. Shove your asspained conspiracy whining and fuck off.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 2) by VLM on Friday December 06 2019, @12:39PM
What about "get woke go broke" ? Its a real problem... In the very long run it takes care of itself, look at the death of legacy former mainstream media, on a percentage basis nobody pays attention to that stuff anymore.
Hard to claim news.google.com propaganda is profit maximization at work...
(Score: 2) by dry on Wednesday December 04 2019, @05:16PM (1 child)
Google leftist? Supporting the people? Supporting trade unions? You must have been going for a funny mod, next you'll be claiming Amazon is even more leftist.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by DeathMonkey on Wednesday December 04 2019, @06:19PM
He needs to tell himself that to make it easier to ignore reality.