indieshack

Rocket_Man said:

It's depressing to see how many commenters just assume that J.K. Scheinberg must have been less qualified or technically adept than younger hires, or that he was over-qualified, or that he must have given a "worse interview, or that he "just didn't 'fit'." One commenter, perhaps emboldened by anonymity, even had the audacity to libel Mr. Scheinberg, suggesting that he was not "looking to WORK" and was, instead, just "looking for a paycheck to coast on til retirement." Did any of you who posted those comments meet Mr. Scheinberg? Did you sit in on his interview? Did you check out his references? Did you read his resume and those of the younger people who were hired? Did you talk to the people who made the hiring decisions for the store? I bet that most of you didn't even click the link to the NY Times article, much less read it before posting your comments. What motivates some people to claim that every allegation of employment discrimination, whether based on gender, race, religion, or sexuality, simply *must* be without merit -- despite all of the statistical and peer reviewed research that proves such discrimination exists and harms so many people?

@mac_dog isn't assuming anything. Just 2 sentences that state the bleeding obvious.