Twitter announces layoffs • Hacker News Board

Re: Twitter announces layoffs

#361

Post by ethbro » Tue, Oct 13, 2015, 9:27 PM UTC

strickjb9 wrote: post #309

bdavisx wrote: post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And at some places, the people who get laid off are the people who aren't friends with the right people in management. It has nothing to do with dead weight. I have seen this exact thing happen in a company I used to work for. It was the catalyst that made me look for another job. I'm not saying this is the case with Twitter, I don't know anything about Twitter as a company.

I doubt Twitter is making deep cuts so they can keep their friends. But it does help to like the people you work with.

Part of being a good software engineer is being tolerable to other software engineers. ;)

Re: Twitter announces layoffs

#362

Post by jsprogrammer » Tue, Oct 13, 2015, 9:28 PM UTC

sneak wrote: post #341

abalone wrote: post #334

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree the email overindulges in euphemisms ("streamline", "restructure", "nimble", "change how we work") and filler phrases ("working around the clock", "moving forward"). But for the most part it does lead with the decision being communicated, i.e. that there will be a "restructuring of our workforce", commonly understood to mean layoffs.

The euphemism "restructuring of our workforce" (versus more direct and explicit language) is the exact type of corporate speak he disclaims. It's dishonest.

I think it may be fair to expect that when a representative of a large corporation disclaims anything, that corporation is somehow engaging in the behavior that it is disclaiming.

There would be no reason to make disclaimers otherwise.

It's a form of the, "I'm not a racist, but...", style of argument.

Re: Twitter announces layoffs

#363

Post by sneak » Tue, Oct 13, 2015, 9:44 PM UTC

jsprogrammer wrote: post #362

sneak wrote: post #341

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The euphemism "restructuring of our workforce" (versus more direct and explicit language) is the exact type of corporate speak he disclaims. It's dishonest.

I think it may be fair to expect that when a representative of a large corporation disclaims anything, that corporation is somehow engaging in the behavior that it is disclaiming. There would be no reason to make disclaimers otherwise. It's a form of the, "I'm not a racist, but...", style of argument.

No, giving people a free pass ("may be fair") to lie is not acceptable, even if lying is expected and commonplace. It's still dishonesty and is supremely unprofessional.

Re: Twitter announces layoffs

#364

Post by tomp » Tue, Oct 13, 2015, 9:47 PM UTC

JustSomeNobody wrote: post #101

celticninja wrote: post #37

> The world needs a strong Twitter Really? Does it? I think Twitter needs a strong Twitter, shareholders need a strong Twitter even Twitter employees need it. However the world is, at best, ambivalent about Twitter, if it disappeared tomorrow a replacement would spring up within a few weeks if the world really needed a way to shotgun their messages into the ether.

Well, according to a lot of newbie developers, twitter can actually be written in a weekend. /s

Whatever value Twitter has, the majority of it definitely isn't in its technical implementation.

Re: Twitter announces layoffs

#365

Post by scrabble » Tue, Oct 13, 2015, 9:55 PM UTC

BinaryIdiot wrote: post #325

coldpie wrote: post #270

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Legitimately asking: Do you have any evidence that this achieves certain goals better than how this email was phrased? Are you sure those goals are the same as those of the author of this email?

I had read a couple of books both of which said the sandwich technique is an out-of-date way of delivering bad news and it's significantly better to do it immediately to help not continue to build up to the bad news that the person on the other side knows it coming (because, let's face it, the sandwich is obvious from 100ft away). Unfortunately I can't figure out what books I read and I'm having a hard time finding s…

The Hard Thing About Hard Things by Ben Horowitz specifically mentions it being terrible.

Re: Twitter announces layoffs

#366

Post by jsprogrammer » Tue, Oct 13, 2015, 9:56 PM UTC

sneak wrote: post #363

jsprogrammer wrote: post #362

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it may be fair to expect that when a representative of a large corporation disclaims anything, that corporation is somehow engaging in the behavior that it is disclaiming. There would be no reason to make disclaimers otherwise. It's a form of the, "I'm not a racist, but...", style of argument.

No, giving people a free pass ("may be fair") to lie is not acceptable, even if lying is expected and commonplace. It's still dishonesty and is supremely unprofessional.

We can still recognize it as being dishonest and unprofessional. One must meet the criteria of being dishonest and unprofessional before we can label it as such.

The fairness is in the labeling (we do not want to unfairly label those who were not actually dishonest or unprofessional; sometimes mistakes do occur), not in the response to the behavior.

Re: Twitter announces layoffs

#367

Post by sulam » Tue, Oct 13, 2015, 9:59 PM UTC

at-fates-hands wrote: post #359

kaonashi wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe they have families and don't want to upset the status quo until it's absolutely necessary.

Which then in most cases is too late, and you're left in the lurch behind the 8-ball. Case in point - Target's acquisition of the Zellers leases on their locations. I had over a dozen people I know who were offered pretty lucrative jobs there. I know another half dozen who balked at their offers (including myself). The people who went were only there about 6 months. Right away, there were signs this was doomed. For s…

All of the engineers laid off could have job offers this week if they wanted, so this is not exactly like that situation. There may be people whose skills aren't in as high demand, but these are the folks that are often the last to see the writing on the wall.

Re: Twitter announces layoffs

#368

Post by dblock » Tue, Oct 13, 2015, 10:05 PM UTC

adevine wrote: post #165

uptown wrote: post #139

"we plan to part ways with up to 336 people from across the company. We are doing this with the utmost respect for each and every person." Bart might disagree: https://twitter.com/bartt/status/653946266938818561

Did you read his followup email? He said they called but he did not pick up. Whenever you have a large layoff, it is fairly standard to lock accounts immediately.

It's standard, but it's shitty and unnecessary.

Re: Twitter announces layoffs

#369

Post by merlincorey » Tue, Oct 13, 2015, 10:06 PM UTC

bduerst wrote: post #354

fredkbloggs wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, really, the world doesn't need any. But I'm curious why you think the world would benefit from fewer.

Isn't there no real value added with HFT? Isn't the question then 'why don't we have fewer?'

HFT is generally touted to provide liquidity, at the least. Of course, there are some that argue against that.

Re: Twitter announces layoffs

#370

Post by cookiecaper » Tue, Oct 13, 2015, 10:18 PM UTC

sneak wrote: post #341

abalone wrote: post #334

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree the email overindulges in euphemisms ("streamline", "restructure", "nimble", "change how we work") and filler phrases ("working around the clock", "moving forward"). But for the most part it does lead with the decision being communicated, i.e. that there will be a "restructuring of our workforce", commonly understood to mean layoffs.

The euphemism "restructuring of our workforce" (versus more direct and explicit language) is the exact type of corporate speak he disclaims. It's dishonest.

People interpret things differently. It's better to err on the kinder side of language and minimize the possibility that someone will interpret your attempt to communicate efficiently as simple crass disregard for the lives affected by the significant decision announced.

I think Dorsey's email is pretty crap-free. I think to the extent that he employs long forms or euphemisms, it's intentionally intended to communicate compassion.

Management is hard, because people are going to read any interpretation that they want into your actions, and there's almost always the potential of reading in a negative interpretation. You truly can't please everyone. All you can do is try to do the best, most reasonable thing, and keep as many people on your side as possible while doing it. There's probably a lot more people that would see "we're cutting" as crass than there are people that see "we're reorganizing" as patronizing.