Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Bill Gurley Is Leaving Uber’s Board

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 170 posts

Re: Bill Gurley Is Leaving Uber’s Board

#141

Post by rtx »

DonHopkins wrote: post #131
austenallred wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, but the claim is extraordinary and requires extraordinary evidence

You don't think it was extraordinary that David Bonderman interrupted Arianna Huffington to make a crude sexist remark about how he believes women on the board talk too much, during the all-hands meeting to unveil Uber’s plan for overhauling its corporate culture? Yes, Uber board member David Bonderman said women talk too much at an all-hands meeting about sexism at Uber: https://www.recode.net/2017/6/13/15795612/ube…

It's a fact that women can speak more than men. But not sure why that is important during board meeting.

Re: Bill Gurley Is Leaving Uber’s Board

#142

Post by neoeldex »

dang wrote: post #120
stale2002 wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From the civil rights act of 1964: "Expanding Rights under the “Retaliation” Provision of Title VII. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (the “Act”) prohibits an employer from retaliating against an employee who has “made a charge, testified, assisted or participated in” any charge of unlawful discrimination under the Act." http://www.sgrlaw.com/ttl-articles/826/ If the civil rights act of 1964 prohibits someth…

It looks like you've been using HN primarily for political and ideological arguments. That's an abuse of the site, and we ban accounts that do it, so please don't use HN this way. The key test is 'primarily'. Commenting occasionally on political topics, among others, is fine. But using the site primarily for political battle is not fine, regardless of which politics you favor. It's destructive of the intended use of…

I have to reply to your comment, since I don't find his comment to be political at all, more pointing to the semantical point of things being illegal. Second, I've browsed through the comments and their submitters comments. I find it striking some people's accounts have been banned on the basis of very few comments.

Lastly, the political debate is often the thing I find interesting about the comment threads on HN, Its getting to see the different viewpoints which interests me. Ofcourse we have to be civil and respectful towards each other, but when we are, I don't see any problem on any topic, how can any topic be destructive to the intended use of the site?

Re: Bill Gurley Is Leaving Uber’s Board

#143

Post by tyingq »

stale2002 wrote: post #112
tyingq wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps it should be actually illegal, like criminally punishible, but it is not. It is a tort, civil violation, etc...but nobody is going to jail.

From the civil rights act of 1964: "Expanding Rights under the “Retaliation” Provision of Title VII. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (the “Act”) prohibits an employer from retaliating against an employee who has “made a charge, testified, assisted or participated in” any charge of unlawful discrimination under the Act." http://www.sgrlaw.com/ttl-articles/826/ If the civil rights act of 1964 prohibits someth…

I think I should have been more clear. I really wasn't trying to nitpick.

Just thought some people might be surprised that the retaliation was not criminal, and at best results in injunctions, fines, civil liability, etc.

Because I didn't word it better, I find myself in the odd position of arguing with people who probably share my high level opinion on the matter.

Re: Bill Gurley Is Leaving Uber’s Board

#144

Post by johnbellone »

stale2002 wrote: post #112
tyingq wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps it should be actually illegal, like criminally punishible, but it is not. It is a tort, civil violation, etc...but nobody is going to jail.

From the civil rights act of 1964: "Expanding Rights under the “Retaliation” Provision of Title VII. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (the “Act”) prohibits an employer from retaliating against an employee who has “made a charge, testified, assisted or participated in” any charge of unlawful discrimination under the Act." http://www.sgrlaw.com/ttl-articles/826/ If the civil rights act of 1964 prohibits someth…

Denny Crane

Re: Bill Gurley Is Leaving Uber’s Board

#145

Post by mattmanser »

V-eHGsd_ wrote: post #50
lettergram wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> caught flat out bribing judges or something. I mean, pretty close: http://www.latimes.com/business/technology/la-fi-tn-uber-gre... They also have that Otto thing: https://www.wired.com/2017/05/googles-fight-uber-takes-turn-... Oh and yeah, and with the push to #deleteuber and the massive amount of cash Uber's burning (or was), I can't imagine they wont be bankrupt soon[1]. [1] http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2017/04…

> and the massive amount of cash Uber's burning (or was), I can't imagine they wont be bankrupt soon let's wait and see what the q2 numbers look like before we start declaring the patient dead. The (for some reason) publicly reported q1 losses of 700m, were (was?) ~33% better than q4 2016 (1b). if the (presumably) publicly reported q2 numbers are in the neighborhood of 500m, you'd be looking at real growth. Quarter e…

Part of that is seasonal, cold = more taxis.

Re: Bill Gurley Is Leaving Uber’s Board

#146

Post by mattmanser »

neoeldex wrote: post #142
dang wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It looks like you've been using HN primarily for political and ideological arguments. That's an abuse of the site, and we ban accounts that do it, so please don't use HN this way. The key test is 'primarily'. Commenting occasionally on political topics, among others, is fine. But using the site primarily for political battle is not fine, regardless of which politics you favor. It's destructive of the intended use of…

I have to reply to your comment, since I don't find his comment to be political at all, more pointing to the semantical point of things being illegal. Second, I've browsed through the comments and their submitters comments. I find it striking some people's accounts have been banned on the basis of very few comments. Lastly, the political debate is often the thing I find interesting about the comment threads on HN, It…

I also have no idea what was wrong with that comment. I wonder if dang replied to the wrong commentator?

I also find it crazy they do this in the threads and not by email, very easy to miss if you don't religiously check your /threads. I got a warning from dang once and he claimed I'd been warned before, which from my perspective I'd never been warned. They have my email.

Re: Bill Gurley Is Leaving Uber’s Board

#147

Post by leroy_masochist »

SREinSF wrote: post #106
johan_larson wrote: post #9

I remain flabbergasted by all of this upheaval at Uber. What's happening is the sort of housecleaning I would expect if the company had to file for bankruptcy or got caught flat out bribing judges or something. But really, what triggered all this was acting like jerks. It seems to me, what should have happened (a long time ago) was that they got shut down for systematically breaking the law, or encouraging others to…

Housecleaning indeed, though some departures were voluntary. 8 top level execs and two board members so far. Link contains a visual of who has left the building, 2 incoming execs and vacant C Suite spots. https://www.recode.net/2017/6/14/15794816/uber-charge-leader... I'm surprised Thuan Pham (CTO) survived the carnage since he was mentioned in Susan Fowler's post. As an aside my dark horse candidates for CEO or COO…

Why on Earth would Susan leave Alphabet to go to Uber? Serious question...I think she probably has more money than she needs now, why would anyone subject themselves to what running Uber is going to be like?

Staggs I can see, he's made it pretty clear he's looking for a big job -- and as a former I-banker and public company corp fin / M&A guy, he very well may have an itch to prove he can hack it in startup-land (a la Anthony Noto).

Re: Bill Gurley Is Leaving Uber’s Board

#148

Post by consz »

hkmurakami wrote: post #26
danaliv wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A jerk is someone who borrows your car and doesn't pay for the dent he puts in the bumper. What happened at Uber was the creation of one of the most insanely hostile work environments in living memory, where flouting not just the law, but also basic standards of human decency, was not only accepted but encouraged at all levels of the company.

So basically all investment banking divisions should be treated with the same regard? I find it strange that we seem to give finance a pass when they've engaged in this sort of behavior for decades.

The culture in finance is a lot more professional (and less sexist) than what was going on in Uber.

Re: Bill Gurley Is Leaving Uber’s Board

#149

Post by zubspace »

goodriddance wrote: post #97
andybg wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

THIS. A million times this. Go ask pmarca too.

pmarca and gurley hate each other. pmarca is definitely the investor I would take money from. In fact, its funny you mention him. He's been hugely useful to Lyft (and his other investments) since he's "purchased" so much "goodwill" among The Who's Who of journalists covering Silicon Valley. As John Doerr once quipped, "No conflict, no interest", and pmarca has learned this lesson well. Every investment he's made in j…

Thanks for the link. This is the best description of what role "PR" plays in our society.

Re: Bill Gurley Is Leaving Uber’s Board

#150

Post by imron »

amrrs wrote: post #140
imron wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> by not much more than bad press for being jerks The problem with being a jerk is that people will dislike you. They might put up with you if you are rich, successful and powerful, but they certainly won't look to help you if you are in trouble and may even come along to help put the boot in. > Makes no goddamn sense. What's happening makes perfect sense. People don't like jerks, and enjoy bringing them down.

He might have been a jerk, not all jerks get the same treatment of being covered in Front Page for every single issue. And that's what makes me believe it's inflated https://hackernoon.com/travis-kalanick-lost-today-hoping-to-...

See above about sticking in the boot when in trouble. Some of that might be opportunistically sticking in the boot, but there's a lot less boot sticking if the person involved is not a jerk.

See also:

http://www.paulgraham.com/mean.html

And

http://www.paulgraham.com/safe.html

Post reply on HN