True, as a few of you have said, it does speak to John P's worldview (obvious, how would it otherwise?). All John P is suggesting is that it says a lot about the people who choose to work for Facebook despite the assumed ethical and moral implications of supporting a company that many people believe to be attacking an open web, among many other allegations, and thus, chooses not to hire those who aren't doing the due diligence to understand those implications, amidst a wide open job market that designers (and developers) have. The applicant isn't going to go hungry.

However, without an interview to get a feel for the person's competence and general fit for the company, sure, it's a bit brash to deny him/her the opportunity without a chance to meet and gauge interest for both parties. But at the end of the day, it's John's choice and in his best interest, for him and his company, to hire how he sees fit, barring obvious discrimination policies.

Why don't we withhold our personal attacks when we disagree with someone's outlook and generate a constructive conversation around this, acknowledging that there will be disagreements and potentially negative views appearing throughout. Not one of us here can truthfully say their worldview isn't without some sort of cynicism based on the actions of others or a larger entity. Facebook just so happens to be the target, and the fallout of its actions brings us many new things to consider, including hiring.