pleasebehonest

So, what would you say to an underprivileged, unattractive, short, Caucasian male? Perhaps, "I'm sorry, but I'm going step on your rights and make you a casualty in the fight for the 'greater good', as defined by me. Please step aside and keep quiet." Or would you bother saying anything to him at all?

Maybe you aren't obsessed with driving wedges between various groups in society, causing them to become factions with increasing animosity towards one another, but you're doing it.

It's odd: No group hates underprivileged, unattractive whites males nearly as much as privileged, attractive white males. It's a cruel form of preening.

It's disgusting.

You ignore underprivileged male hackers because too many other hackers are male? How is that fair?

I'm sorry, but we aren't going to help you. Why? You have the wrong organ between your legs. Next!

Are you sure what you're doing is even legal? What do you do about trans/intersex applicants, or do they not matter to you?

I would be surprised. Do you have an example?

How do you define sexist?

Do you define sexist to mean the belief that one gender should be able to violate the rights of the other? That one gender is better than the other?

That one gender is different from the other?

Under your definition, why is sexism bad?

That attitude is abrasively condescending.

Why not just say, "people who spent a lot of their time studying cryptography strongly recommend this approach. They feel the approach that you are considering is simply insecure."?

Framing things in terms of intelligence isn't going to win anyone over, if that's your goal. And it probably isn't accurate, either.

Is Backbone.js worth it for interactive web pages that don't require posting to a server?

Is it necessary to do this before ever reaching any conclusion? Should we never trust our own observations until they've been approved with such vigor?

Does MongoDB have any advantages over using de-normalized tables within PostreSQL?