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

‘Tokenized’: Black Workers’ Struggles at Coinbase

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 717 posts

Re: ‘Tokenized’: Black Workers’ Struggles at Coinbase

#231

Post by adjkant »

roenxi wrote: post #191
xenadu02 wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you've never done this sort of thing before: there's a huge market for these "external consultants". Their unstated job (and reputations) are as whitewashing firms. You hire them to ensure there is "no evidence" of anything done wrong. The primary purpose is to create a credible defense in lawsuits but PR purposes are also common. Firms that find problems suddenly see their business dry up because most companies d…

To repeat the grandparent, what else can they do? Many of the "issues" bought up in this article aren't even problematic. It says John Russ left because Armstrong took public stance that he wanted Coinbase to focus on crypto space stuff. Coinbase's stance there is fair, reasonable and moral. It is desirable that some companies just do what it says on the tin. If Russ had a reason for quitting that was race-related th…

> Coinbase's stance there is fair, reasonable and moral

The 60 people who left makes it clear this is not agreed upon. HN has already played out this debate on the original post so I'll save going into it here, but it's disingenuous to say that Russ didn't quit because of race-related policy, whether or not you think the policy is race-related.

That said, putting out that "apolitical stance" in the direct wake of George Floyd/BLM is unavoidably tied. As others have said, timing is key. If they had the policy from day 1, they might have a leg to stand on. It seems likely in context with this article (and frankly, to many before this) that Coinbase's apolitical stance is not a rejection of all politics but a tacit rejection of George Floyd/BLM. No one should be surprised about a diversity problem in such a company.

This "what else can they do?" question stems from a criminal judicial standard of guilt and conviction, but that is not where this discussion exists. To think that Coinbase must be innocent and needs to prove that over many former employees being on the record + clear statistical issues that all align with the narrative the company has set with previous actions shows a central flaw in the tech community's approach to racism and politics.

I realize the question does not direct say that they must be innocent, but the implications and assumptions here are important to note, and certainly lean in that direction.

Re: ‘Tokenized’: Black Workers’ Struggles at Coinbase

#232

Post by thegrimmest »

ygjb wrote: post #125
treis wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thinly veiled insults aside, you didn't address my actual point. The people in the article risked all the repercussions you mentioned by formally reporting the abuse and speaking with the NYTimes. Saying that they would do that but not risk snapping a pic of a racist e-mail, as an example, doesn't make any sense.

Insulting people wasn't my intention, but I have some uncharitable views of the HN community members that cry meritocracy and find founders blameless. You are correct that the people in the article that either filed complaints, or spoke with the New York Times risked repercussions, but not all of the folks the Times spoke with are identified. People were willing to talk, but not necessarily on the record, or to be id…

Can I just step in, in defense of individualism and meritocracy here?

I would like to challenge the perception of issues as systematic being a universal fact. You first have to accept that groups, as opposed to individuals, are responsible for action. This doesn't seem to hold up. Any delineation of people into any sort of groups is arbitrary. Corporations are legal fiction. Actions are perpetrated by individuals.

I would like to live in a society that optimizes for enthusiastic consent in, and at-will termination of all interactions and relationships for any reason whatsoever. This seems to be the only reasonable way to live in a society of people who disagree about fundamental things. To take this to the extreme, if you want to run a company full of racists, and be racist in your hiring policy, you should be able to do so. It is quite possible to support this standard of liberty without being racist oneself. I may disagree with what you say and all.

Re: ‘Tokenized’: Black Workers’ Struggles at Coinbase

#234

Post by cbthrow91 »

ntsplnkv2 wrote: post #172
6c9be5fc6b39 wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The article implies that a number of the Black people who left did so because the compliance division was relocated and they didn't want to relocate with it. It doesn't say how many people's decisions were influenced by annoying work crap that they interpreted as discrimination. This is a really dishonest article. It tries to lead one to believe things (e.g. that 15 Black people left Coinbase because they were belitt…

It didn't come across as dishonest at all, but your post did. > The article implies that a number of the Black people who left did so because the compliance division was relocated and they didn't want to relocate with it. It doesn't say how many people's decisions were influenced by annoying work crap that they interpreted as discrimination. And mentions the one white person was allowed to stay remote. Pretty dishone…

You are omitting the fact that the one white employee switched to working out of the NYC office. There's no mention of a black employee making the same request and it being denied, just the request to wfh being denied for both white and black employees.

And then you are extrapolating two uncorroborated anecdotes of inappropriate comments as evidence of widespread discrimination.

Re: ‘Tokenized’: Black Workers’ Struggles at Coinbase

#235

Post by 2-tpg »

tptacek wrote: post #224
2-tpg wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The article was written as if the hook/angle for the article was created after the No-Politics-Policy, then filled in by contacting former and current employees. I don't think a report with "Coinbase gets lots of unfair flak, but tries really hard to be inclusive" article would be published, or even could have been written with the selection of sources. That's like scientists finding a negative result, and not gettin…

An anonymous Coinbase employee upthread has claimed that the "no politics" rule was in place before 2020.

Not in response to the rule, but to the media cycle that followed publication of the rule.

I don't believe that in the editing room they went: "Next item. The Coinbase controversy. Let's do an objective investigation of this and see what we find." But I won't accuse the NYT of bad faith, economic/journalistic incentives are sufficient to explain that angle, fishing for further controversy for a company with an already bad reputation (deserved or not).

Notice the NYT article even wrote negatively of Coinbase's diversity efforts: Supposedly, black people where shoed into photos, to make the company look good to the outside, but were never promoted or listened to (implying, because they were black, and white Libertarian autist tech bro's don't listen to or promote their black employees as a matter of principle). With such an angle about questionable motives, it is neigh impossible to do anything right. It is "we already determined you are wrong, now where is your apology?".

Re: ‘Tokenized’: Black Workers’ Struggles at Coinbase

#236

Post by tptacek »

2-tpg wrote: post #235
tptacek wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An anonymous Coinbase employee upthread has claimed that the "no politics" rule was in place before 2020.

Not in response to the rule, but to the media cycle that followed publication of the rule. I don't believe that in the editing room they went: "Next item. The Coinbase controversy. Let's do an objective investigation of this and see what we find." But I won't accuse the NYT of bad faith, economic/journalistic incentives are sufficient to explain that angle, fishing for further controversy for a company with an alread…

I don't understand. If Black employees were deliberately encouraged to show up to be photographed, but otherwise ignored and passed over for advancement, it doesn't take much of an editorial slant to show a problem; that behavior is inherently problematic.

Re: ‘Tokenized’: Black Workers’ Struggles at Coinbase

#237

Post by 0xB31B1B »

cbthrow91 wrote: post #211
whymauri wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>CB is a really great company for any curious nerd to join. Not if they're black or brown, apparently. I have no idea how you could say this is a 'great' company after reading this article. Like my mind is actually blown.

I work on a diverse team at CB that has engagement scores through the roof. And you don't need to know the survey data to know that; just join us for lunch. We're curious, we care about each other, and we care about the mission. The NYTimes is like the Daily Prophet for muggles. Don't over-index on a hit piece.

You mention diversity. Do any black folks work on your team? Do you think it’s possible that black engineers are treated well and black CX are treated poorly?

Re: ‘Tokenized’: Black Workers’ Struggles at Coinbase

#238

Post by adjkant »

throwmylifawy wrote: post #214

Reading through the comments as black person is depressing. Many of the comments question whether the accusations are even true or collusive attack because of an unfounded accusation that black people tend to be SJWs (stereotyping). Others blame affirmative-action, bad schools, etc. (classic misdirection). Some even venture into the possibility that a black person complaining about being passed over for promotion mig…

Very well said.

People seem to be trying to apply a criminal prosecution level standard for proof/evidence, one that is almost never applied to other companies on non hot button issues or generally on HN. You highlighted the specific hoops people are jumping through well. I hope maybe people can examine why they are so motivated to use this hypocritical double standard to defend this company they have no direct ties with.

Re: ‘Tokenized’: Black Workers’ Struggles at Coinbase

#239

Post by SpicyLemonZest »

adjkant wrote: post #231
roenxi wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To repeat the grandparent, what else can they do? Many of the "issues" bought up in this article aren't even problematic. It says John Russ left because Armstrong took public stance that he wanted Coinbase to focus on crypto space stuff. Coinbase's stance there is fair, reasonable and moral. It is desirable that some companies just do what it says on the tin. If Russ had a reason for quitting that was race-related th…

> Coinbase's stance there is fair, reasonable and moral The 60 people who left makes it clear this is not agreed upon. HN has already played out this debate on the original post so I'll save going into it here, but it's disingenuous to say that Russ didn't quit because of race-related policy, whether or not you think the policy is race-related. That said, putting out that "apolitical stance" in the direct wake of Geo…

Are there other non-crypto political stances Coinbase has taken? It seems to me that this was just the first time they needed such a policy. I certainly wouldn't have anticipated the possibility of a new political slogan that almost every major company is forced to chant.

Re: ‘Tokenized’: Black Workers’ Struggles at Coinbase

#240

Post by tptacek »

roenxi wrote: post #226
chris11 wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Armstrong took public stance that he wanted Coinbase to focus on crypto space stuff. I don't think that he would have taken that public stance if he didn't feel that the company was being distracted internally by racial justice issues. It being a fair response is highly dependent on those internal conversations. And the NY Times reports that prior to this conversation there was a public meeting where Black employee…

Well, I don't know what is going on in Coinbase. But the NYT has in the past overplayed the race card with no evidence. Now I'm happy to agree that the retention rate of black people at Coinbase raises some questions. But the NYT, having asked those questions, came up with no particular evidence of racism. The major piece of evidence that these issues are substantially due to race is that the NYT felt it warranted a…

On the contrary, they came up with several examples of biased behavior, including an instance where the Black members of a team were required to relocate while a non-Black member wasn't, an instance where a Black team member was subjected to to insults about drug dealing and guns from their manager, recruiting team member claims that Black candidates were less capable, the fact that Coinbase employs Black workers at less than half the average of the industry, and the fact that Black workers were dismissed in meetings, to the point where a pattern of repeated HR complaints occurred.
Post reply on HN