Here are the parts of the statement I am disappointed with, to clarify, emphasis mine:
> *This system wasn't balanced.* It was based on contacts. ... there were more channels, more ways to complain, open to the left (well, Democrats) than the right.
I can certainly agree with the fact that 90+% of Big Tech employees vote Democrat (I'm not sure what "non-coder" has to do with it). 100% true.
I have worked at large corporations for a long time, so I know a second fact: corporate employees do not make any controversial decisions you will hear about as an outsider. At best we get to present feedback to our boss.
Here we see an employee making such a decision by themself; now let's make an assumption and say this was done to promote their leftist agenda. Within 24 hours, the decision is overridden and it is made clear who the real agenda-setters are at most Big Tech. I'll give you a hint: it's not the employees, and it was only 2% Jack.
In my experience, engineers are more likely to be pragmatic people, which is more of a right-wing/libertarian trait. This is not a constant.
> Within 24 hours, the decision is overridden and it is made clear who the real agenda-setters are at most Big Tech.
It is overridden quietly, with no apology or acknowledgement of the harm they did. If this was something anyone in leadership actually cared about, we'd see the typical PR response. Instead, crickets.
It is (was) reality. Have you met average big-tech non-coder?