There is no need to tell an employer your previous salary.

You don't think it affects your job prospects when you refuse?

If they won't hire you because you won't disclose your salary, you don't want to work for that company anyway.

Problem: cannot find jobs.

Solution: don't want to work for them anyway.

I think a much more likely scenario is that you won't get an interview at all. An employer is unlikely to consider you for a junior role that requires < 5 years of experience when you've had > 10 years experience in another field.

Well in India recruiters ask for the current salary & expected salary by default. If you don't provide this info, your resume heads to the trash.

maybe those are different people

A venn diagram will provide all possible combinations of opinions, but there are definitely people out there who suggest 'he/she' or 'zhe' instead of 'they' because the latter 'sounds funny'

Zhe has got to be the stupidest proposal I've heard of. Let's invent a word using a letter that almost never leads non-loanword English words to solve a problem that only pedants and people who are eager to find sexist oppression in the innocuous are bothered by.

Do you think they really liked to do all that?

If it let them win? Yes. Read _The Prince of the Marshes_, and read up on the nature of shame cultures.

Careful of the huge confirmation bias inherent in the art you see vs. the art that's being created. Your spheres (not you specifically -- all of HN) likely tend toward exposing you to those kinds of projects.

What makes you think so?

Out of all of the art that is done I am pretty sure only a portion are a hook for a Kickstarter or marketing material.

I'd be surprised if 0.001% of art projects are related to Kickstarter in any way, or even if 0.001% of artists have even heard of Kickstarter. Maybe in SV it's different.

... Or even, dare I say it, look at life as quality not quantity, as something unquantifiable?

(You could have chosen a less contentious example of a meritorious practicing artist :-)

I'd say just the concept of Russian Roulette is art in itself. Thereby the artist I referenced above is not very contentious. He is risking his life for a message - that gamble with life is art.

On the same note, what may be more contentious is the art of crime. The art of murder. The art of Sherlock Holmes deciphering the creative tendencies behind the craftiest of criminals. Murderers. Thieves.

Are terrorists also artists? That my friend, is contentious.

he's not even close to right.

"Sins" kind of implies that they're disapproved. The gospel of Jesus Christ is in fact that Jesus died to win forgiveness of your sins, but immediately after saying "I do not condemn you", he said "go and sin no more."

There is nothing in Christian Evangelism that inherently implies that University teachers are right about everything and have no need to engage with students' understanding of Christianity.

If you take the article's anecdote at face values, the student wasn't discussing Christian theology; he was scolding the speaker for making him feel bad. The passage in question (1 Cor. 13) is one of the most inoffensive passages in the bible, widely recited at even secular weddings for example.

Distilled down, the school is saying that if a lesson on how we should selflessly love others makes you feel bad about yourself, the lesson you should take away is that you have some improvements to make in yourself -- not that you've been emotionally raped.

Was the OP article written in a tone of "selfless love"?

Being an asshole to students, or even sinners, is not Christian as in Christ. The university is operating under false pretenses.

I guess I see what you're trying to do - and I'm not a Christian; but the Christ depicted in the New Testament wasn't shy about calling out inappropriate behavior. He didn't politely ask the money changers to leave the temple, he flipped their tables over.

He fought the sin by removing them from the temple whemnthey were committing bad acts, he didn't flip when they were expressing their feelings.

I question your premise that the author of the article flipped. By your same logic, the pastor was simply expressing his feelings and is thus beyond reproach.

Facts of the underlying matter aside, this is an incredible immature piece that I expect from a young student who hasn't learned logic and rhetoric or didactics, not a University President.

Saying "War on Christmas is alive and well in Christianity" is like saying "Daesh is alive and well in Islam". It is smearing a much larger group for the misbehavior of a small segment of demagogue extremists.

Watching FoxNews is not the same as espousing all its broadcasted opinions.

What I find interesting is that such posts, which epitomize Poe's law, despite seeming ambiguous (since you don't know if OP really believes/means "X" or "not X") can still be correctly interpreted as garbage posting by readers. You don't need to figure out if they are sarcastic or not.