“About one-third of Basecamp employees accepted buyouts today” • Hacker News Board

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

#771

Post by randallsquared » Sat, May 01, 2021, 4:41 AM UTC

grey-area wrote: post #589

jollybean wrote: post #557

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think this is an unfair representation and you are straw-manning the situation at least somewhat. The company doesn't think that 'name calling' is appropriate, rather, they don't believe that this activity is the beginnings of some kind of 'race war' and object to language such as 'leads to genocide' as hyperbolic. "unhappy that their employees asserted power over them in the workplace," Yes, if your staff are exer…

This is not the appropriate language: it's their company, and their responsibility. It's not a 'personal fiefdom'. I used the word deliberately. They mistook their relationship with their employees for a feudal one, they have now discovered it was not. It's unreasonable to believe that excessive fear-mongering such as language regarding 'leads to genocide' should be accepted at face value. I imagine gentle disagreeme…

> They mistook their relationship with their employees for a feudal one, they have now discovered it was not.

Does this square with offering people half a year's salary if they wanted to leave rather than continue working there?

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

#772

Post by 55555 » Sat, May 01, 2021, 4:44 AM UTC

nomdep wrote: post #637

acjohnson55 wrote: post #571

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This pretty much nails it. The "politics" angle has been revealed to be a red herring by the subsequent accounts of everyone involved. The same contentious discussions would have happened had this policy already existed! I guess you could say the policy gives the founders a ban hammer to swing to end discussions they don't like. Separated from their justification, the 6 policies represent an assertion that Basecamp l…

1/3 of the staff that believes in things like that the “It doesn’t have to be crazy at work” title is ableist (see the Jane Yang post). Even when refers to a situation and not to a person. How radicalized you have to be to lose your capacity for critical thinking like that? If anything, Basecamp is a much better place to work now, without them

Do you have a link to the ableist controversy? I havent seen that.

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

#773

Post by solipsism » Sat, May 01, 2021, 4:45 AM UTC

ZephyrBlu wrote: post #759

jrochkind1 wrote: post #451

People are gonna wanna make this about politics, but my sense is that it's really just about the owners of basecamp are crappy tyrants to work for, that's about it. I don't think it's really even about the specific policy. Note that the "changes" [1] also include "no more committees" (ie, no more feedback/authority/responsibilty except through the line-of-report hieararchy), "no bringing up past decisions you disagre…

I find this to be a very odd take. I believe no committees is because Jason and DHH don't think they're productive. Not bringing up past decisions you disagree with makes sense to me. What's the point in re-judging the past? The reason DHH mentioned for 360 reviews was that they didn't contain any real criticism because you're critiquing your co-workers (I'm paraphrasing), and that makes perfect sense to me. I wouldn…

The reason DHH mentioned for 360 reviews was that they didn't contain any real criticism because you're critiquing your co-workers (I'm paraphrasing

This part stood out for me. This is a very simplistic view, and I would expect more from company leaders.

Of course peer feedback is colored. But that doesn't mean it's without signal.

A statement like "Sandra is great, her work is consistently on time" can be ignored. It's essentially no data.

But a statement like "I couldn't have completed feature X without Susan. She did X, Y, and Z, and these things weren't even part of her job. Everyone needs to be more like Susan." Well... that statement tells you something. And you now have a basis of comparison between Susan's work and Sandras. Give Susan a bonus and Sandra a thumbs up.

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

#774

Post by spamizbad » Sat, May 01, 2021, 4:47 AM UTC

Semiapies wrote: post #297

ipaddr wrote: post #152

Interestingly the employees who left have the best career prospects. Entire iOS team, head of marketing and head of product team. The 6 months free money is hard for anyone entering a strong job market to pass up. A lot of comments seem to think 1/3 left because of the no politics policy. 1 / 3 left because it would increase their wealth or give them the summer covid took away last year. How many people would leave y…

I've noticed a lot of rather wishful thinking here and on Twitter along the lines of that the people who left are all woke layabouts or whatever and that this is some genius management move. No explanation of how to reconcile these ideas with the fact that so many of these people who left were in leadership positions.

Lots of people believe in the Just World Fallacy[1]. Everyone who disagrees with me is incompetent, and everyone who agrees with me is highly skilled.

[1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Just-world_hypothesis

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

#775

Post by neartheplain » Sat, May 01, 2021, 4:48 AM UTC

gkop wrote: post #638

christophilus wrote: post #515

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When I see a Jehovah’s Witness coming up to my door, I pretend to not be home. I’d really hate to be forced to have that same feeling at work, but be unable to escape it. If you can’t do your job without evangelizing your coworkers in some form or fashion, maybe you should reconsider your career choices.

Please don't equate human rights activism to a religious movement.

Historically, religion and human rights activism are closely conjoined. Anthropologically, religious proselytization and ideological activism are nearly indistinguishable phenomena.

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

#776

Post by etempleton » Sat, May 01, 2021, 4:48 AM UTC

I don't pretend to know what the culture is like at Basecamp, nor do I have a dog in this fight, but as a general observation I have found the recent openness of people to discuss their feelings and opinions about anything and everything at any place, including at work, a bit...weird. I guess growing up an emphasis was placed on knowing my "place," so it is a foreign concept to me in that regard. I do not judge people who feel otherwise, but I cringe when I see it even when I agree with the sentiment.

I understand that there are often real issues at hand and positive movement that people want to make in the workplace, but it is career suicide, and always will be, to join a committee that makes demands of leadership.

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

#777

Post by draw_down » Sat, May 01, 2021, 4:52 AM UTC

shostack wrote: post #748

georgeburdell wrote: post #422

I laud them for standing up for their ideals. That said, as a conservative, I don't ever "bring my whole self to work", even if my employer says to, because (a) I know my personal views are not welcome in the Bay Area, and (b) I think it's concerning that many companies are trying to become more than just a place to work on interesting stuff and get paid for your work. They must now make political views known that al…

I'm curious, what conservative views do you hold that you think would make you so incompatible?

Come on

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

#778

Post by markmark » Sat, May 01, 2021, 4:53 AM UTC

brown9-2 wrote: post #645

baron816 wrote: post #181

What I think is lost in the conversation here is that people don’t really have organizations they can go to to advocate their political positions. People have their families, their jobs, and maybe a couple of friends and that’s about it. They need an outlet to push the ideas and causes they care about. The workplace is one of the few places where they can feel like they’re having an impact, but that’s not really appr…

> I’d hate to go into work and be harassed about being “silent is complicit” (which seems like it was one of the major drivers of the change) What is the source for this?

The original "Changes at Basecamp" post banning political discussion: "You shouldn't have to wonder if staying out of it means you're complicit"

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

#779

Post by [deleted] » Sat, May 01, 2021, 4:54 AM UTC

Cyberdog wrote: post #312

ipaddr wrote: post #152

Interestingly the employees who left have the best career prospects. Entire iOS team, head of marketing and head of product team. The 6 months free money is hard for anyone entering a strong job market to pass up. A lot of comments seem to think 1/3 left because of the no politics policy. 1 / 3 left because it would increase their wealth or give them the summer covid took away last year. How many people would leave y…

Do you think people in charge of hiring, particularly outside of the SV bubble, are going to be eager to pick someone up who left their last job because they couldn't agree to stop bitching about politics on the company dime? I don't see how demonstrating the inability to follow basic company rules in the interest of productivity improves their career prospects. Even inside the SV bubble, things aren't that warped, a…

[deleted]

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

#780

Post by overgard » Sat, May 01, 2021, 4:57 AM UTC

spyckie2 wrote: post #642

ipaddr wrote: post #152

Interestingly the employees who left have the best career prospects. Entire iOS team, head of marketing and head of product team. The 6 months free money is hard for anyone entering a strong job market to pass up. A lot of comments seem to think 1/3 left because of the no politics policy. 1 / 3 left because it would increase their wealth or give them the summer covid took away last year. How many people would leave y…

Yes, people are reacting to the policy. But it's definitely that the policy is a reaction to something as well. Probably, the founders believed that the toxicity of the internal culture had reached a point where it was extremely detrimental to the workplace. And, knowing DHH, it was probably not only a financial decision but a lifestyle one. He may have realized that the advocates that actively discussed and promoted…

Yeah, honestly this seems like addition by subtraction. The last thing I would want at work is to navigate around ultra-sensitive trigger-warning micro-aggression seeking activists. Not that all the people leaving were that, but it sure sounds like a lot were. At work I just want professionalism and respectful behavior, along with people that have moderately thick skin and don't seek to find offense everywhere.