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

Sex Scandal Toppled a Silicon Valley Chief. Investors Say, So What?

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 135 posts

Re: Sex Scandal Toppled a Silicon Valley Chief. Investors Say, So What?

#31

Post by jchw »

exogeny wrote: post #27
jchw wrote: post #10

>Mr. Cagney was romantically involved with an employee, even though he had previously told directors that he was not involved in any extramarital workplace relationships Okay...? If that's literally the extent of what they found then this is kind of a non-story. Calling it a "sex scandal" is even quite clickbaity in my opinion. Like, yes, there is a conflict of interest. Potential for abuse or coercion. But nowhere d…

Again, it's not really about the relationship. It's about misusing company funds for it, not to mention lying to HR and the board about it. The tone of the comments on this thread so far is basically: if I can’t lie, embezzle, break multiple company regulations, and expose both myself and the company to sexual harassment charges, how am I ever going to meet Mrs. Right? I hope you understand how insane that is.

This is fair, but all the more reason to criticize the article, which does nothing to convince one that this person should be lined up next to people accused of sexual harassment, nor mentions their misuse of funds, even in passing.

Re: Sex Scandal Toppled a Silicon Valley Chief. Investors Say, So What?

#32

Post by kinggfx »

rayiner wrote: post #29
otherworld wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree. We're living in increasingly socially conservative times. Somewhat ironically this seems to be due to the moral superiority of the "left" rather than the traditionalism associated with the right. I also find the implicit assumption that all people who break the current moral codes of the day (even if they did so in the past!) should be henceforth unemployable and the subject of social outrage.

What we're living in is the vindication of Andrea Dworkin's views about the sexual revolution: https://www.theatlantic.com/sexes/archive/2013/03/how-the-se... . Women are renegotiating the rules in a way that isn't so one-sidedly beneficial to men. Part of that is putting constraints on when and where sexual propositioning is appropriate (and it's not appropriate in the workplace).

What are the constraints?

Re: Sex Scandal Toppled a Silicon Valley Chief. Investors Say, So What?

#33

Post by smsm42 »

exogeny wrote: post #27
jchw wrote: post #10

>Mr. Cagney was romantically involved with an employee, even though he had previously told directors that he was not involved in any extramarital workplace relationships Okay...? If that's literally the extent of what they found then this is kind of a non-story. Calling it a "sex scandal" is even quite clickbaity in my opinion. Like, yes, there is a conflict of interest. Potential for abuse or coercion. But nowhere d…

Again, it's not really about the relationship. It's about misusing company funds for it, not to mention lying to HR and the board about it. The tone of the comments on this thread so far is basically: if I can’t lie, embezzle, break multiple company regulations, and expose both myself and the company to sexual harassment charges, how am I ever going to meet Mrs. Right? I hope you understand how insane that is.

> It's about misusing company funds for it

Then it's embezzlement scandal, not sex scandal.

Re: Sex Scandal Toppled a Silicon Valley Chief. Investors Say, So What?

#35

Post by cycrutchfield »

kolbe wrote: post #24
cycrutchfield wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who said anything about morality? This is precisely about conflicts of interest, mismatched power dynamics, and potential abuse of authority. It is a situation that should be avoided at all costs because it can be exceedingly corrosive for an organization.

So, should we also disallow any other conflicting personal relationships up the chain of command? Where do we stop? Romantic relationships? Family? Friends? All of them create the same conflicts of interest and mismatches power dynamics.

Ever heard of the word nepotism? This is not exactly groundbreaking stuff.

Re: Sex Scandal Toppled a Silicon Valley Chief. Investors Say, So What?

#37

Post by rayiner »

kinggfx wrote: post #32
rayiner wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What we're living in is the vindication of Andrea Dworkin's views about the sexual revolution: https://www.theatlantic.com/sexes/archive/2013/03/how-the-se... . Women are renegotiating the rules in a way that isn't so one-sidedly beneficial to men. Part of that is putting constraints on when and where sexual propositioning is appropriate (and it's not appropriate in the workplace).

What are the constraints?

It's a process that's still shaking out. I strongly suspect dating coworkers will be on the chopping block. Anecdotally: I've never heard a woman say "you know, I wish more people would ask me out at work." They view it as an imposition.

Driving those changes will be technology like Tinder. By making the market for dating more efficient, it will reduce the need to permit romantic solicitations in other contexts.

Re: Sex Scandal Toppled a Silicon Valley Chief. Investors Say, So What?

#38

Post by squarefoot »

rayiner wrote: post #29
otherworld wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree. We're living in increasingly socially conservative times. Somewhat ironically this seems to be due to the moral superiority of the "left" rather than the traditionalism associated with the right. I also find the implicit assumption that all people who break the current moral codes of the day (even if they did so in the past!) should be henceforth unemployable and the subject of social outrage.

What we're living in is the vindication of Andrea Dworkin's views about the sexual revolution: https://www.theatlantic.com/sexes/archive/2013/03/how-the-se... . Women are renegotiating the rules in a way that isn't so one-sidedly beneficial to men. Part of that is putting constraints on when and where sexual propositioning is appropriate (and it's not appropriate in the workplace).

"constraints on when and where sexual propositioning is appropriate (and it's not appropriate in the workplace)."

That would be right if only we didn't build a society requiring every non rich member to spend most of his non sleeping life at workplace.

Re: Sex Scandal Toppled a Silicon Valley Chief. Investors Say, So What?

#39

Post by rustcharm »

cycrutchfield wrote: post #13
jchw wrote: post #10

>Mr. Cagney was romantically involved with an employee, even though he had previously told directors that he was not involved in any extramarital workplace relationships Okay...? If that's literally the extent of what they found then this is kind of a non-story. Calling it a "sex scandal" is even quite clickbaity in my opinion. Like, yes, there is a conflict of interest. Potential for abuse or coercion. But nowhere d…

Breaking promises and lying to your board of directors is a non-story?

We all agree he should have been fired. What we don't agree on is his right to work again. Many on the left say his life should be over.

Re: Sex Scandal Toppled a Silicon Valley Chief. Investors Say, So What?

#40

Post by exogeny »

yontherubicon wrote: post #34

Good lord, what do these people want? For men who gasp have sex to not have jobs? No. Of course. That's exactly they want. Well... to not have jobs when they say .

I don't know about you, but when I have sex, it typically doesn't involve lying to my board, or embezzling funds.
Post reply on HN