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

“About one-third of Basecamp employees accepted buyouts today”

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 1001 posts

Re: “About one-third of Basecamp employees accepted buyouts today”

#41

Post by bdcravens »

Trasmatta wrote: post #34
marbletiles wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“If you liked “How to build a blog in 15 minutes with Rails,” check out the sequel, ‘How to destroy Rails in 15 minutes with a blog.’”(From https://twitter.com/sandofsky/status/1388174804985868289 )

It's a funny Tweet, but Rails is much, much bigger than Basecamp now. There's enough money invested in the Rails ecosystem at enough large and medium sized companies that Basecamp could go away entirely and Rails would continue to persist. (I realize that there's always the possibility that this post could age like milk, and everyone might be pointing at laughing at me in 5 years. But that's also pretty much true for…

I've seen more than a few tweets in recent days from those who feel distraught as Rails developers. Perhaps it's silly, but the Rails ecosystem and culture plays a big role in its success.

Re: “About one-third of Basecamp employees accepted buyouts today”

#42

Post by minimaxir »

Ozzie_osman wrote: post #40

I'm surprised this isn't on the front page here. 120 points in an hour. Plenty to discuss. I hadn't seen this article and posted an article similar from the Verge and it was almost instantly flagged. EDIT: Looks like it bounced back and forth. I'm still getting downvoted on this comment though....

Everything involving Basecamp seems to get death-by-flags pretty quickly, which is disappointing.

The better question is how this post got 120 points while not being on the front page.

EDIT: Looks like dang unflagkilled it.

Re: “About one-third of Basecamp employees accepted buyouts today”

#43

Post by throwawaysea »

I really hope more companies declare their workplaces to be politics free. I am completely tired of the long march through the institutions (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_long_march_through_the_ins...) that has culminated in corporations being weaponized for one-sided progressive political agendas. These departures really just give away the biases of the tech industry at large.

As for Basecamp's leaders - I think they did the right thing in making their blog posts and sticking to their principles. However, they should not have offered a buyout incentive, which can expose a small organization like themselves to destabilization. They also tuned the buyout offer incorrectly - it basically provides free money, which will be tempting to even those who would be fine working there. Really that's the only part they got wrong. I hope they're able to hire quickly and make it through this period - if they do, this will have been the right decision in the long-term, since there's no point in retaining employees who have such a mismatched set of values.

Re: “About one-third of Basecamp employees accepted buyouts today”

#44

Post by mendelmaleh »

TigeriusKirk wrote: post #10

If a third of the people were willing to leave the company over a decision, it sounds like there was a real, meaningful mismatch in priorities. Which is fine, but it's for the best for everyone to end that mismatch.

If two thirds were willing to stay even with such a good severance package, it sounds like most agree with the decision...

Re: “About one-third of Basecamp employees accepted buyouts today”

#45

Post by thrower123 »

minimaxir wrote: post #42
Ozzie_osman wrote: post #40

I'm surprised this isn't on the front page here. 120 points in an hour. Plenty to discuss. I hadn't seen this article and posted an article similar from the Verge and it was almost instantly flagged. EDIT: Looks like it bounced back and forth. I'm still getting downvoted on this comment though....

Everything involving Basecamp seems to get death-by-flags pretty quickly, which is disappointing. The better question is how this post got 120 points while not being on the front page. EDIT: Looks like dang unflagkilled it.

I believe that if you submit a URL and it already exists, and it's within some time limit of the original posting, that acts like an upvote. Or at least it used to work like that.

Re: “About one-third of Basecamp employees accepted buyouts today”

#46

Post by SpicyLemonZest »

switz wrote: post #12
the-dude wrote: post #2

"Changes at Basecamp" : https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26944192 ( 4 days ago, 774 comments ). Which is a feel good piece about management philosophy ( a bit back to our roots ) and does not mention layoffs once.

If you want more context, this article really breaks down what happened internally. There's a lot more to the story than was presented. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26963708

Seconded. I'm one of the strongest "no politics at work" guys you'll find, and unless there's substantial missing context, even I would consider leaving Basecamp over this. A widely circulated list to make fun of people's names is pretty egregious, and demands a lot more introspection on company culture than it sounds like the founders were willing to do.

Re: “About one-third of Basecamp employees accepted buyouts today”

#47

Post by SpicyLemonZest »

minimaxir wrote: post #42
Ozzie_osman wrote: post #40

I'm surprised this isn't on the front page here. 120 points in an hour. Plenty to discuss. I hadn't seen this article and posted an article similar from the Verge and it was almost instantly flagged. EDIT: Looks like it bounced back and forth. I'm still getting downvoted on this comment though....

Everything involving Basecamp seems to get death-by-flags pretty quickly, which is disappointing. The better question is how this post got 120 points while not being on the front page. EDIT: Looks like dang unflagkilled it.

These kind of submissions tend to bounce back and forth as flags and upvotes fight against each other. I've been on the front page 3 times in the past 10 minutes, and it was there the first and third time.

Re: “About one-third of Basecamp employees accepted buyouts today”

#48

Post by marbletiles »

Trasmatta wrote: post #34
marbletiles wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“If you liked “How to build a blog in 15 minutes with Rails,” check out the sequel, ‘How to destroy Rails in 15 minutes with a blog.’”(From https://twitter.com/sandofsky/status/1388174804985868289 )

It's a funny Tweet, but Rails is much, much bigger than Basecamp now. There's enough money invested in the Rails ecosystem at enough large and medium sized companies that Basecamp could go away entirely and Rails would continue to persist. (I realize that there's always the possibility that this post could age like milk, and everyone might be pointing at laughing at me in 5 years. But that's also pretty much true for…

Agreed, but culture and mindshare matter. You can be big like node or big like Perl. Losing cachet can be like going out of business: slow then sudden.

Re: “About one-third of Basecamp employees accepted buyouts today”

#49

Post by toomuchtodo »

Trasmatta wrote: post #30
danjac wrote: post #18

I wouldn't be surprised if this will become a case study in future in how to self-destruct a successful company with a single bad communication, much like Gerald Ratner (although this may be due to long-term grievances we're not aware of).

It's awfully ironic, given how Basecamp has built their entire brand off of good management, and running a non-toxic workplace. Regardless of what people think of the specifics of the policy, it's a good case study in how not to do something like this. Releasing a blog post that results in 1/3rd+ of your employees resigning is bad management.

1/3rd of your employees so far. Would like to see how many stick around having to operate in an environment where a third of your coworkers just walked (based on past experiences when this occurred due to layoffs).
Post reply on HN