If it is your company then this is fine, it is your money afterall, and can do as you see fit. If you are employed or have co-shareholders, you are managing someone elses money. And you are not supposed to act within your morals, but those of the company. It would be kind of hipocritical to act on your own morals using someone elses money - up to the point where it could be illegal misapropriation. And then taking the moral highground and being judgemental about people because they worked in gambling is probably something one should reconsider.

▲

JumpCrisscross 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> It would be kind of hipocritical to act on your own morals using someone elses money - up to the point where it could be illegal misapropriation

This is hyperbole. Refusing to hire anyone out of any of the big tech companies is an own goal. But being silly in management is absolutely legal. The only legal obligation I can think of revolves around disclosure, i.e. you should be open with investors and the company about the fact that you're putting up these moral guardrails, rails which may have effects on the company's competitiveness.

▲

littlecranky67 4 hours ago | parent [-]

It is not black/white. If you have a qualified candidate that asks less money and reject them over a less-qualified candidate on the sole grounds they worked for a prediction marked, it could be called silly. If the discprancy in qualification and salary demends is high enough and you do this repeatedly, it can be gross misconduct and not only a reason to be fired, but to be held financially liable for the damage.

	▲	JumpCrisscross 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		> If the discprancy in qualification and salary demends is high enough and you do this repeatedly, it can be gross misconduct and not only a reason to be fired, but to be held financially liable for the damage Again, major caveat, if you do it without disclosing your reasons, possibly. And unless you're personally profiting from it in some way, highly doubtful on financial liability. (Disclaier: not a lawyer.)

▲

alfalfasprout 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Acting within your morals is not incompatible with serving the company's interests. Especially if it means your team is very much still competent while maintaining a culture that is healthy. That leads to better delivery.

Avoiding working in deeply unethical areas also shields the company from legal or PR liability.

	▲	littlecranky67 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		It is compatible if you align your actions with the morals of the company. A big sign that you are not aligned with the values of the company, if you do not want anybody within that company (especially your boss) to know on what moral grounds you make your decision and justify your actions.

▲

closewith 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

No, you should always follow you're own moral code.

Companies don't have morals, only people. Abdicating your moral responsibilities because you're employed is cowardice.

▲

dwaltrip 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> up to the point where it could be illegal misapropriation

Huh..?

> And then taking the moral highground and being judgemental about people because they worked in gambling is probably something one should reconsider.

Ah I see.