I didn't think it was all that awesome. The somewhat echoed opinions on James Damoore are disappointing.
It started well with "The ex-Googler did a very stupid thing. He decided to let his intellect drive his internal biases and ended up producing a document that he no doubt felt at the time was a powerful corrective argument to what he sees as a misplaced assertion within Google that the company needs to hire more women and more people from different races and backgrounds to balance its dominant white, male Caucasian culture."
I can understand the apparent author-bias in this, and it's "over-look-able". Differing opinions are usually interesting.
But wait.. THEN the article went on to say things like "It uses highly subjective language to push demeaning or mocking arguments. It provides "evidence" as an afterthought or not at all."
NOT the article that _I_ read. It didn't do that. I just got done summarizing it in another forum. So yeah, I read the thing. And commented on it. I didn't see *ANY* of what the author alleges.
So after wasting an ENTIRE page blasting this guy and making sound like some kind of "throwback" [I'm surprised "1950's" or "slavery" wasn't mentioned], the article COMPLETELY misses the point that Google was (in effect) soliciting opinions, and when a dissenting opinion was offered, one going against the political correctness culture, one that tries to show that their attempts at 'divesity' are hurting the company, they _SILENCED_ him, and created a "chilling effect" for anyone ELSE who might DARE to say the SAME kinds of things.
[it's why I don't work for companies like Google - that kind of "hostile environment" would drive me to RAGE QUIT]
However, the other points on the following pages were ok.
I'd give it an "Average" with some caveats about page 1.