Hacker News Reader

Comment by Lucadg | Hacker News Reader

I used to work in a camping site in Northern Italy many years ago. We were openly told not to accept people from the south of Italy as they statistically were more noisy. I didn't like it but it actually made sense. It just wasn't viable to mix Germans and Napoleteans in a tight space. I guess Germans earned that right with politness. Then one day I let gipsies in and I almost got fired.

View on HN

What would make sense is to say "we only accept campers that are quiet at night - and we'll throw them out of they don't comply and disturb other people's sleep". What you did is racism.

Now ever if your statistics were true (I doubt you properly measured that) it simply doesn't matter. Even if 90% of people from some region are noisy at night that doesn't justify rejecting the other 10%.

I think the decision to pre-filter was based on the fact that kicking someone out was extremely difficult. Police had to be involved or some really bad thing had to happen. So the approach "ok we let anyone in, these are the rules, if you don't respect them you are out" is for sure more fair but it just wouldn't work. Theory vs Reality. And when you have 2000 people in a tight space you kind of want to avoid these situations.

I have no statistics but we can safely assume that 30 years of experience have taught the camping managers what works and what doesn't. I think it was in their right to decide who comes in and who doesn't.

I'm Italian and if you won't let me into your crystal shop because I wave too much my hands when I talk and you're afraid I'll break something (I personally don't wave hands), I'll understand. I will be angry sure, but not with you: with the other hand waving italians.

>I'm Italian and if you won't let me into your crystal shop because I wave too much my hands when I talk and you're afraid I'll break something (I personally don't wave hands), I'll understand. I will be angry sure, but not with you: with the other hand waving italians.

Are you sure you wouldn't be annoyed if this actually happened? I find that a bit difficult to believe. Say, you walk into a cafe and politely order an espresso, and then the owner kicks you out because you're Italian.

yes, I'd be annoyed for sure. Imagine that it's a well known fact that italians in the US always complain about the espresso because it's too watery (this is pretty likely actually). The owner kicks me out saying "I've got enough of you italians, you always complain! Get the espresso in your own country!". I'd be upset with the owner at first but then realize the fault is mostly with those bloody italians...

The owner would obviously have no justification for kicking you out in that hypothetical scenario.

I am on your side, but to play the devil's advocate, this is a case in which a way to predict loudness before they get loud is required. Is there a way to do this effectively without dipping into protected categories? Nobody wears 2am loudness on their forehead when checking in at 4pm.

Replace "south of Italy/Napoleteans" with "Latinos", "Germans" with "whites", and "gipsies" with "blacks". Do you still feel okay saying that?

no because that would make it a racial discrimination. Ours was more a cultural one.

That's what the racists think too, here in the U.S. anyway. They think they are just not okay with the "culture" of the people they are racist against.

Can I not be okay with someone's culture without being racist?

I don't hate or discriminate against Indians, but I despise how they view and treat women in their culture.

http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-37735370

And what about the people who have distanced themselves from that culture (if they even experienced it at all) but are still that race? You can differentiate based on the actions and ideas because those are under the person's control for the most part, and not by protected categories because those are not. Despise the people who treat women that way, which might happen to be statistically applicable to a race, but not the race wholesale.

I can appreciate your logical reasoning, but people will continue to make snap judgements based on the knowledge and past experiences available to them.

Yes, non discrimination is nice on paper, but it is another issue when there's money on the line

I wonder which right should prevail in general: a) the right to host people I like and don't host people I dislike in my home b) the right to be what I want and be accepted everywhere.

Again, I guess A should probably prevail and the Internet should take care of matching who I am with the hosts happy to have me.

"regardless of their race, religion, national origin, ethnicity, disability, sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, or age"

We also manage bookings for apartments on the beach and openly write "Apartment for families. Groups of young people up to 30 years are not accepted." in Airbnb and other portals. So, is Airbnb saying we'll be forced to accept noisy and unruly drunk groups who will probably bring drugs and extra friends in the middle of the night damaging the newly build apartments? This just makes no sense.

So it will be either: - This is not real, just some facade for political correctness - We'll get customers from other portals

Yes discrimination can often be beneficial to the bottom line. It's still wrong though.

What a sad and pathetic excuse for discrimination based on culture and values. You're not only generalizing you seem to be in denial. Pay a visit to any popular vacation holiday in Spain or Portugal and test for yourself who are the loud, abnocious and ugly Europeans. We are doing our best to avoid any concentration of brits, Germans and Dutch on our holidays for the exact reason. We recently bought a house in Spain in a place we made sure was not popular with either, for this particular reason. Will be happy to share with you photos of ugly drunken Germans in mas lpalomas, loud and voulgar brits in Barcelona and Ibiza, a city which is struggling to contain this problem, which is mostly due to British visitors, or all of them in place like el Garf. You might want to discriminate based on money, but like the Russians are teaching us, no amount of money in the world can help hide voulgarity. Drumpf btw is of German extract. I'm sure you'll enjoy your company and will probably deserve it.

> What a sad and pathetic excuse for discrimination based on culture and values

Discrimination based on skin color seems self evidently bad, but discrimination based on culture and values seems not just not bad, but actively good!

Why should i associate with someone who regards theft as okay? Why would i want to hire someone who thinks that disagreements should be solved with yelling or fistfights?

You're essentially saying that the mere existence of a prejudice justifies discrimination. You think that most Napoleteans are thieves, so in your mind, this justifies discriminating against Napoleteans. Similarly, a racist may think that most black people are criminals, and think that this justifies discriminating against black people.

How do you know someone's culture when they are booking a hotel room online?

A few years later I worked in Benidorm and I know what you mean :) Only it turns out those Germans in the camping were a different sort: zero problems, ever. I'm sure we would have been told to refuse Germans if they had been noisy/impolite. I'm also pretty sure 90% of the south italians we refused would have been nice and polite and more friendly that the average German. That's why I said I didn't like it. But it's the other 10% they were trying to avoid. 10% bad guys can easily spoil the holiday to 90% good ones.

Not an easy business to be in, but sometimes you don't have a choice.

What a sad and pathetic excuse for discrimination based on culture and values

And

avoid any concentration of brits, Germans and Dutch

Make an interesting juxtaposition. You might want to think about that.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com