Justice for New Haven Firefighters

[Nik]

I even gave Nik the benefit of the doubt, asked for any test, but Nik can't even prove any test can be racist ... odd that.

Actually I have proven it. Other people have realized the obvious truth of what I was saying. Why can't you?

Do you think that a test that I can manipulate to change how well whites v. blacks do is racist?

No, other people have just gotten bored ....

I have asked you to show it's possible, in any way, and yet you have not demonstrated it's possible, so no. A test of any sort can NOT be "manipulated" in such a way, unless again you are saying black folks are inherently stupid. So which is it? Are you being dishonest to make white folk look bad (thus being racist) or are you saying black folks are inherently less intelligent (also being racist)?

No, I have demonstrated its possible, fuckwit.

Answer my above question. You are pretty bad at simple tasks, apparently.

 

[KittenKoder]

Actually I have proven it. Other people have realized the obvious truth of what I was saying. Why can't you?

Do you think that a test that I can manipulate to change how well whites v. blacks do is racist?

No, other people have just gotten bored ....

I have asked you to show it's possible, in any way, and yet you have not demonstrated it's possible, so no. A test of any sort can NOT be "manipulated" in such a way, unless again you are saying black folks are inherently stupid. So which is it? Are you being dishonest to make white folk look bad (thus being racist) or are you saying black folks are inherently less intelligent (also being racist)?

No, I have demonstrated its possible, fuckwit.

Answer my above question. You are pretty bad at simple tasks, apparently.

No you have not, unless you somehow posted something other than the lame "Spanish" example ... you haven't even tried.

 

[Nik]

No, other people have just gotten bored ....

I have asked you to show it's possible, in any way, and yet you have not demonstrated it's possible, so no. A test of any sort can NOT be "manipulated" in such a way, unless again you are saying black folks are inherently stupid. So which is it? Are you being dishonest to make white folk look bad (thus being racist) or are you saying black folks are inherently less intelligent (also being racist)?

No, I have demonstrated its possible, fuckwit.

Answer my above question. You are pretty bad at simple tasks, apparently.

No you have not, unless you somehow posted something other than the lame "Spanish" example ... you haven't even tried.

Oy. See the NYC example. Of course both work, only you are too stupid to see it.

And way to fail at answering simple questions. No wonder you can't say anything intelligent and are impossible to deal with if it takes me 5 posts to get you to answer a simple yes or no question. You really are a dishonest fuck, aren't you?

 

[KittenKoder]

No, I have demonstrated its possible, fuckwit.

Answer my above question. You are pretty bad at simple tasks, apparently.

No you have not, unless you somehow posted something other than the lame "Spanish" example ... you haven't even tried.

Oy. See the NYC example. Of course both work, only you are too stupid to see it.

And way to fail at answering simple questions. No wonder you can't say anything intelligent and are impossible to deal with if it takes me 5 posts to get you to answer a simple yes or no question. You really are a dishonest fuck, aren't you?

Another of your epic fails ... that shows only locale differences, nothing at all to do with race yet.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Oh, well, because you say it has nothing to do with racism, then it doesn't. Try proving your point sometime instead of just making asinine assertions over and over. Even DiveCon recognizes that a test can be racist, are you really going to admit you are more stupid than him?

the thread is about this particular test not all tests.

this particular test was as even handed as they come and everyone had the exact same opportunities to do well and hence be considered for a promotion.

Really? So you've looked at all the questions and you know its even handed? Or are you just making this up?

have you looked at the test and found racially discriminatory questions?

there has not been one report that the questions were racially discriminatory

in fact the only discrimination perpetrated here was against those that scored the highest.

and I didn't have to read each question. the SCOTUS in its decision said there was nothing wrong with the test, or the scoring methods, or the firefighters union agreement to consider promotions on weighted scores of both written (70%) and oral (30%) exams

and Justice Kennedy concurs

High court rules for white firefighters in discrimination suit; reverse race bias charge upheld

In New Haven's case, "there is no evidence -- let alone the required strong basis in evidence -- that the tests were flawed because they were not job-related or because other, equally valid and less discriminatory tests were available to the city," Justice Kennedy wrote.

And I'll say it again

everyone taking that test had the exact same opportunity to study and master the material so it was a fair as it gets in the real world.

 

[Nik]

No you have not, unless you somehow posted something other than the lame "Spanish" example ... you haven't even tried.

Oy. See the NYC example. Of course both work, only you are too stupid to see it.

And way to fail at answering simple questions. No wonder you can't say anything intelligent and are impossible to deal with if it takes me 5 posts to get you to answer a simple yes or no question. You really are a dishonest fuck, aren't you?

Another of your epic fails ... that shows only locale differences, nothing at all to do with race yet.

Going to answer the question, or continue to lie?

 

[manifold]

So you've looked at all the questions and you know its even handed? Or are you just making this up?

I can't speak for him, but I'll tell you why I believe the test was even handed. There is a mountain of evidence that suggests that it was fair. There is only one data point that suggests that it might not be fair, the number of black applicants that qualified for promotion. So to answer your strawman question, no I have not seen all the questions. And I doubt you have either. Yet you take no pause in concluding that this one data point PROVES that the test MUST be racially biased. And you compound your ignorance and sanctimonious, hypocritical arrogance by criticizing others for drawing their own conclusions based on the available information, just as you have. It appears that you won't even consider the possibility that the test was fair. A clearer case of a closed mind is not easily found.

 

[Nik]

the thread is about this particular test not all tests.

this particular test was as even handed as they come and everyone had the exact same opportunities to do well and hence be considered for a promotion.

Really? So you've looked at all the questions and you know its even handed? Or are you just making this up?

have you looked at the test and found racially discriminatory questions?

there has not been one report that the questions were racially discriminatory

in fact the only discrimination perpetrated here was against those that scored the highest.

and I didn't have to read each question. the SCOTUS in its decision said there was nothing wrong with the test, or the scoring methods, or the firefighters union agreement to consider promotions on weighted scores of both written (70%) and oral (30%) exams

and Justice Kennedy concurs

High court rules for white firefighters in discrimination suit; reverse race bias charge upheld

In New Haven's case, "there is no evidence -- let alone the required strong basis in evidence -- that the tests were flawed because they were not job-related or because other, equally valid and less discriminatory tests were available to the city," Justice Kennedy wrote.

And I'll say it again

everyone taking that test had the exact same opportunity to study and master the material so it was a fair as it gets in the real world.

No, actually, he didn't say they weren't discriminatory. Try reading that sentence you quoted again. He said there was no evidence they could have made them less discriminatory, not that they weren't discriminatory.

 

[Nik]

So you've looked at all the questions and you know its even handed? Or are you just making this up?

I can't speak for him, but I'll tell you why I believe the test was even handed. There is a mountain of evidence that suggests that it was fair. There is only one data point that suggests that it might not be fair, the number of black applicants that qualified for promotion. So to answer your strawman question, no I have not seen all the questions. And I doubt you have either. Yet you take no pause in concluding that this one data point PROVES that the test MUST be racially biased. And you compound your ignorance and sanctimonious, hypocritical arrogance by criticizing others for drawing their own conclusions based on the available information, just as you have. It appears that you won't even consider the possibility that the test was fair. A clearer case of a closed mind is not easily found.

I concluded that one data point proves that the test must be racially biased? Can you point me to where I said that? Feel free to look, but you won't find it. I don't know whether it was or not, but I know that the results create the presumption of bias under federal law. By the way, this ruling didn't change that presumption of bias.

And what is the "mountain" of evidence that says that the test was even handed? I've seen little to no evidence on that score.

 

[manifold]

I concluded that one data point proves that the test must be racially biased? Can you point me to where I said that?

That is the impression you've left me with. Are you really this oblivious to what you are actually posting?

I don't know whether it was or not, but I know that the results create the presumption of bias under federal law.

Link?

And what is the "mountain" of evidence that says that the test was even handed? I've seen little to no evidence on that score.

You've chosen to ignore it. It's all over the internet and this thread too.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Really? So you've looked at all the questions and you know its even handed? Or are you just making this up?

have you looked at the test and found racially discriminatory questions?

there has not been one report that the questions were racially discriminatory

in fact the only discrimination perpetrated here was against those that scored the highest.

and I didn't have to read each question. the SCOTUS in its decision said there was nothing wrong with the test, or the scoring methods, or the firefighters union agreement to consider promotions on weighted scores of both written (70%) and oral (30%) exams

and Justice Kennedy concurs

High court rules for white firefighters in discrimination suit; reverse race bias charge upheld

In New Haven's case, "there is no evidence -- let alone the required strong basis in evidence -- that the tests were flawed because they were not job-related or because other, equally valid and less discriminatory tests were available to the city," Justice Kennedy wrote.

And I'll say it again

everyone taking that test had the exact same opportunity to study and master the material so it was a fair as it gets in the real world.

No, actually, he didn't say they weren't discriminatory. Try reading that sentence you quoted again. He said there was no evidence they could have made them less discriminatory, not that they weren't discriminatory.

tests are supposed to be discriminatory the people who don't know their shit are discriminated against
and if you want to pick nits, Kennedy actually said there is no evidence that equally valid less discriminatory tests were available

thus implying that this test was about as good as it gets for its purpose.

 

[Ravi]

You've chosen to ignore it. It's all over the internet and this thread too.

Link?

I have seen no such evidence either.

 

[manifold]

You've chosen to ignore it. It's all over the internet and this thread too.

Link?

I have seen no such evidence either.

You haven't looked, have you?

 

[Ravi]

You've chosen to ignore it. It's all over the internet and this thread too.

Link?

I have seen no such evidence either.

You haven't looked, have you?

Yep, I read the thread and I read the ruling. The court stated that the city didn't demonstrate that there were less discriminatory tests available. That doesn't speak to your statement that there are mountains of evidence that show the test was even handed.

 

[Nik]

I concluded that one data point proves that the test must be racially biased? Can you point me to where I said that?

That is the impression you've left me with. Are you really this oblivious to what you are actually posting?

You don't seem to understand that its not my responsibility to correct your mistaken impressions. Me arguing that the test cannot be shown to be non-discriminatory, and in fact there is a presumption of discrimination is NOT the same as me saying that it MUST be discriminatory. Would you really ascribe such a strong claim that I think something MUST happen, without actually seeing it?

Apparently you would. This is the common strawman fallacy that you seem to be fond of. Rather than read what I am actually saying, you ascribe the strongest position possible to me, so that its much easier to attack. If this actually the impression that an accurate reading would portray, you should have no problem posting exactly what gave you that impression. Instead, its clear that you will do no such thing and instead expect me to somehow fix your cognitive difficulties.

I don't know whether it was or not, but I know that the results create the presumption of bias under federal law.

Link?

Try reading the district court opinion. Surely you would have done that before picking one side or another, yes?

And what is the "mountain" of evidence that says that the test was even handed? I've seen little to no evidence on that score.

You've chosen to ignore it. It's all over the internet and this thread too.

Of course it is.

 

[Nik]

have you looked at the test and found racially discriminatory questions?

there has not been one report that the questions were racially discriminatory

in fact the only discrimination perpetrated here was against those that scored the highest.

and I didn't have to read each question. the SCOTUS in its decision said there was nothing wrong with the test, or the scoring methods, or the firefighters union agreement to consider promotions on weighted scores of both written (70%) and oral (30%) exams

and Justice Kennedy concurs

High court rules for white firefighters in discrimination suit; reverse race bias charge upheld



And I'll say it again

everyone taking that test had the exact same opportunity to study and master the material so it was a fair as it gets in the real world.

No, actually, he didn't say they weren't discriminatory. Try reading that sentence you quoted again. He said there was no evidence they could have made them less discriminatory, not that they weren't discriminatory.

tests are supposed to be discriminatory the people who don't know their shit are discriminated against
and if you want to pick nits, Kennedy actually said there is no evidence that equally valid less discriminatory tests were available

thus implying that this test was about as good as it gets for its purpose.

Are you lying, or do you really not understand that when he says discriminatory he means racial discrimination?

 

[manifold]

I doubt anyone can pry open the mind of Ravi when it comes to core principles of political correctness, but I'll indulge.

Evidence that the test was fair:

- They hired an outside consulting outfit to prepare an unbiased, relevant exam for the specific purpose of evaluating a firefighter's suitability for promotion.

- The unions agreed that this was fair

- Nobody was disallowed participation on the basis of race

- Everyone was given the same curriculum requirements and study material

- Everyone was permitted the same amount of time to complete the exam

- There have been no specific, credible examples produced of any questions that are racially biased. And if you don't think it's been scoured for such, you're even dumber than you're projecting.

 

[manifold]

Still waiting for a link to this alleged presumption of bias federal law.

 

[Nik]

Still waiting for a link to this alleged presumption of bias federal law.

Did you read the district court opinion?

 

[del]

Still waiting for a link to this alleged presumption of bias federal law.

Did you read the district court opinion?

which part of "post a link" baffles you, liar?