ToxicMegacolon

> They raise the cost of housing

Oh! how dare they! How can they even think of finding a place to live

It has become a norm on the internet. Even calling it out is usually met with downvotes, name-calling, and more hateful replies.

> I would interview 10 H1B's, and then one domestic candidate

Do you ask people their visa status during interview?

If you do not ask them about visa status, then how do you know they weren't a domestic candidate? Is it a judgement based on race/skin-color/accent?

If you do ask them this question, How do you keep that information from influencing your decision in the interview?

> Which is fine, ... Not every place needs to be the same.

Exactly. Which is why certain country is fine with their school kids being shot at with assault rifles as long as they have freedom™

> This ruling seems as corrupt as they go

The defamation case is still ongoing. But I guess any ruling that isn't favoring Wikipedia will automatically be "corrupt"

I was being sarcastic to the other commenter because I see complete withdrawal of Wikipedia from India as an absurd overreaction to what this case is about. That is what the parent comment is calling for, specifically, I quote "Wikipedia should just block India completely."

As to my reply to your comment, I recognize Wikipedia's right to not conduct their business in India if they chose to do so, for whatever reason. I interpret your comment as saying that there would be nothing wrong in Wikipedia exercising this right - which I agree with. So I stated my point earnestly that while I agree there is nothing wrong in exercising this right. It seems what it amounts to is that either the court rules in their favor, or they withdraw from India. If that is the expectation that India courts should just rule in their favor (even when they are in the wrong), then I am sorry but that is not acceptable.

Hope that clarifies things. Either way, I am going to withdraw from this discussion as well

> (or whatever gross turn of phrase you'd like to use).

This makes it seem like your reply isn't in good faith.

So feel free to twist my words as you please, add your own interpretations to it, and accuse me of whatever you want to accuse me with. I am done discussing this topic with you specifically.

Agreed. Nothing wrong with it. I was just trying to fully understand what the other commenter said.

If following the law is such a burden on them then they should by all means pack up and leave. This is also what the Delhi High Court said after Wikipedia chose to ignore its order. This applies to all western institutions and corporations. If the expectation is that, Indian courts and the Indian public should continue to bend over then that is not going to happen.

> The rest of us not in India don’t want to be affected by the rulings of a Delhi court.

How wikipedia choses to follow rulings of Delhi High Court is not India's problem. This is 100% on wikipedia to implement it without a geo block, so maybe you should take this up with Wikipedia.

I don't think that will help a lot. This my opinion, but I think most Indians treat western sources such as NYT, BBC to be biased/racist against India. If wikipedia were to put a banner on top, it would just end up being another entry in that list.

> India, much like Nazi Germany,

To compare the largest democracy in the world to a genocidal regime is utterly disrespectful to the 1.5 Billion Indians.

> if the appeal is not successful and ANI wins, I think Wikipedia should just block India completely.

Let me see if I understand this correctly. It seems below is the sequence of events you are advocating for:

1. Wikipedia is allowed to legally represent themselves in the court of law. 2. Court looks at the case presented by ANI and Wikipedia, and decides that ANI is right and Wikipedia is wrong 3. Wikipedia should take this out on average Indian citizens, and make them pay because Wikipedia was found to be at fault in a court of law.

Makes sense

why do they have to? is it just verizon or do others have to do unlock it after 60 days too?

If I were that employee, I'd take the exception, quiet quit and start looking for a better job elsewhere.