<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>munificent</author><text>&lt;i&gt;&amp;gt; It&amp;#x27;s still politically dangerous, and would earn a company a lot of enemies and mistrust&lt;/i&gt;&lt;p&gt;Yes, doing the right thing often is dangerous and earns you hatred from other people doing bad things who love the freedom of hiding amongst a herd of other equally guilty people.&lt;p&gt;The reason we have so much respect for people who take stand and do what they believe is right is &lt;i&gt;because&lt;/i&gt; doing so is so hard. That doesn&amp;#x27;t mean you shouldn&amp;#x27;t do it.</text><parent_chain><item><author>rattray</author><text>That is true – businesses are legally allowed to refuse service to anyone (apart from protected classes like race or political affiliation, but that probably does not apply here). It&amp;#x27;s an important right, and probably many businesses would be more profitable and happy if they exercised that right more often.&lt;p&gt;It&amp;#x27;s still politically dangerous, and would earn a company a lot of enemies and mistrust (as well as some allies, though they may be the type to just ask for more, as others on this post have mentioned).</text></item><item><author>jobeirne</author><text>&amp;gt; But to expect that a _federal agency_ will be denied service from a private entity, especially for essentially political reasons, is lunacy.&lt;p&gt;Um, think you&amp;#x27;ve got this backwards. Private entities shouldn&amp;#x27;t have to take on &lt;i&gt;anyone&lt;/i&gt; they don&amp;#x27;t want as customers (for whatever reason - do you have to justify who you do or don&amp;#x27;t want in your livingroom?), but publicly-funded institutions shouldn&amp;#x27;t be able to deny service on political grounds.</text></item><item><author>rattray</author><text>What a bummer that workers are publicly demanding this, and (presumably) seeking press attention on it.&lt;p&gt;I&amp;#x27;m no fan of ICE – a very large percentage of my friends in the US are immigrants, and I generally want my country to be a welcoming one. ICE has certainly committed unethical and probably illegal acts (probably true of most federal agencies).&lt;p&gt;But to expect that a _federal agency_ will be denied service from a private entity, especially for essentially political reasons, is lunacy. It&amp;#x27;d attract extreme negative attention from the rest of the government, and great fear from all paying customers that an internet mob could separate them from their code at any time.&lt;p&gt;We should absolutely be lobbying hard for changes to immigration law, the restrictions placed on ICE, and justice for their wrongdoings.&lt;p&gt;But I can&amp;#x27;t see how this helps improve immigration, and it certainly seems likely to cause a lot of negative consequences for GitHub. The employees are putting their employer in a &amp;quot;damned if they do, damned if they don&amp;#x27;t&amp;quot; situation.&lt;p&gt;EDIT: Just to clarify, I love the vision of a world where executives don&amp;#x27;t take actions their workers will protest. I think that in order to get there, the protests need to be reasonable, and I think this one isn&amp;#x27;t.&lt;p&gt;EDIT DISCLAIMER: I own a small amount of MSFT stock, which was not on my mind as I wrote this. I use GitHub&amp;#x27;s free service and have no other relationship I can think of with MSFT or GitHub.</text></item></parent_chain></comment><story><title>After GitHub CEO backs Black Lives Matter, workers demand an end to ICE contract</title><url>https://www.latimes.com/business/technology/story/2020-06-12/github-ceo-black-lives-matter-employees-demand-end-ice-contract</url></story>
<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>cameronfraser</author><text>How would businesses be more profitable if they exercised the right to refuse service more? You also realize the people who exercise this right the most do it for reasons you likely don&amp;#x27;t agree with.</text><parent_chain><item><author>rattray</author><text>That is true – businesses are legally allowed to refuse service to anyone (apart from protected classes like race or political affiliation, but that probably does not apply here). It&amp;#x27;s an important right, and probably many businesses would be more profitable and happy if they exercised that right more often.&lt;p&gt;It&amp;#x27;s still politically dangerous, and would earn a company a lot of enemies and mistrust (as well as some allies, though they may be the type to just ask for more, as others on this post have mentioned).</text></item><item><author>jobeirne</author><text>&amp;gt; But to expect that a _federal agency_ will be denied service from a private entity, especially for essentially political reasons, is lunacy.&lt;p&gt;Um, think you&amp;#x27;ve got this backwards. Private entities shouldn&amp;#x27;t have to take on &lt;i&gt;anyone&lt;/i&gt; they don&amp;#x27;t want as customers (for whatever reason - do you have to justify who you do or don&amp;#x27;t want in your livingroom?), but publicly-funded institutions shouldn&amp;#x27;t be able to deny service on political grounds.</text></item><item><author>rattray</author><text>What a bummer that workers are publicly demanding this, and (presumably) seeking press attention on it.&lt;p&gt;I&amp;#x27;m no fan of ICE – a very large percentage of my friends in the US are immigrants, and I generally want my country to be a welcoming one. ICE has certainly committed unethical and probably illegal acts (probably true of most federal agencies).&lt;p&gt;But to expect that a _federal agency_ will be denied service from a private entity, especially for essentially political reasons, is lunacy. It&amp;#x27;d attract extreme negative attention from the rest of the government, and great fear from all paying customers that an internet mob could separate them from their code at any time.&lt;p&gt;We should absolutely be lobbying hard for changes to immigration law, the restrictions placed on ICE, and justice for their wrongdoings.&lt;p&gt;But I can&amp;#x27;t see how this helps improve immigration, and it certainly seems likely to cause a lot of negative consequences for GitHub. The employees are putting their employer in a &amp;quot;damned if they do, damned if they don&amp;#x27;t&amp;quot; situation.&lt;p&gt;EDIT: Just to clarify, I love the vision of a world where executives don&amp;#x27;t take actions their workers will protest. I think that in order to get there, the protests need to be reasonable, and I think this one isn&amp;#x27;t.&lt;p&gt;EDIT DISCLAIMER: I own a small amount of MSFT stock, which was not on my mind as I wrote this. I use GitHub&amp;#x27;s free service and have no other relationship I can think of with MSFT or GitHub.</text></item></parent_chain></comment><story><title>After GitHub CEO backs Black Lives Matter, workers demand an end to ICE contract</title><url>https://www.latimes.com/business/technology/story/2020-06-12/github-ceo-black-lives-matter-employees-demand-end-ice-contract</url></story>