Hacker News Reader

I would describe it as more of a chilling effect on voting "not inclined" or raising concerns on performance.

In my experience, 1) being not inclined on such a hire leads to more scrutiny 2) managing performance is prone to more scrutiny

So: while the standard is expected, it's enforced to a lesser degree in practice. Which means a few bad apples abusing this unfortunately make everyone else (in the group who meet/beat the standard) look bad.

View on HN

If someone does not say something because of fear of how they will be perceived I’m not sure the policy is the root cause ... and if a whole group of people behave that way (as I would assume often more than one person would have the same reservation) then that points to other issues.

And if a company’s culture uses affirmative action or quotas to hire people who they should not have, then that’s just racism of a different kind, and, I’d argue, not necessarily unique to or always caused by the policy.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com