Earlier quoted context omitted.
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…
The Jehovah's Witness comment was so on point. I grew up with a single father, who was prone to religious fanaticism. Plenty of fundamentalist, culty churches. When I was a teen, my father met a radical vegan animal rights activist, started dating, and suddenly swapped out religious fanaticism for radical left-wing activism. The smells in my house changed, and the people looked different, but fundamentally they were…
“About one-third of Basecamp employees accepted buyouts today”
971–980 of 1001 posts
Re: “About one-third of Basecamp employees accepted buyouts today”
#972I can see a typical job interview for one of those employees: ‘And why did you leave your last job?’
‘They wouldn’t let me waste half the day arguing politics’
Re: “About one-third of Basecamp employees accepted buyouts today”
#973What 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…
Re: “About one-third of Basecamp employees accepted buyouts today”
#974The proposed changes are wholly reasonable, and definitely not that different from 99% of the companies out there. The real problem is that they’ve spent years hiring for a type of person where this sort of thing is anathema.
Yeah, DHH is very outspoken politically, and fairly progressive. Of course there was going to be a selection bias where they hired similar people. This shouldn't have come as a surprise to them, and they should have realized the backlash. Shockingly bad foresight.
Re: “About one-third of Basecamp employees accepted buyouts today”
#975In fall 2008 I moved from Long Island to New Hampshire (for family reasons) and found a job in a small niche B2B shop doing C# Windows apps. On my first day of work, I notice the receptionist desk has a stack of McCain/Palin 2008 bumper stickers. The next couple of months were filled with employees talking non-stop about the election, from their deeply conservative point of view. Being quite progressive left-leaning…
I remember the same thing in 2000 when my colleague brought "Sore/Loserman" sign mocking (unknowingly) my candidates. I could not help but think less of him. I am not proud of that, but that was it. It's inside our DNA, to live in tribes. At work, it'd be better if we belong to the same tribe. Please, keep your other tribes outside.
Re: “About one-third of Basecamp employees accepted buyouts today”
#976Back with the DotCom boom, there was an attempt to make the workplace a "club" - a place to hang out. Beer bashes, pool, foosball, ping pong tables... all of that. Yea, I'll grant its nice to relax to... but if you're staying late to play foosball with a coworker, that's the encroachment.
It may have made us more productive - gotten a few more hours a week of work in or kept some of the more vagabond-esque engineers around for a few more months.
But it also made the workplace a place to be rather than the third place and in doing so, also took some of the other things that the third place was too... but the workplace does the third place poorly... and it can't do it well.
The third place needs to be a neutral ground with no ties to those who are there. The coffee shop book club doesn't force anyone to be there. But the workplace, you need to be there for a pay check. If the book club gets bad, you can leave - not so with the workplace.
The third place needs to be level - with no status beyond "regular". The workplace has managers and leads and HR... it has CEOs and founders and a legal department.
While the workplace are sometimes saying "we are a community" - we know in our orgchearts that HR is there to protect the company, not organize book clubs and beer tastings.
This has become even more of an issue with the pandemic-wfh. The traditional third places are closed, or have limits on how many people can be there at once - and you've got to be 6' away from the other people. So we've got virtual third places. Some of the slack channels that I'm on have lit up over the past year.
And so, those companies that have encroached the most in the past are seeing it even more now. Where before the water cooler discussions of five minutes of politics are now immortalized in slack channels and message boards. Where people who would like to go to the coffee shop and pontificate about the wrongs of the workplace and politics are now forced to do it on message boards and slack channels.
Those companies that have gone further into the third places but don't have the ability to moderate the tone or power differentials are seeing it more. Those companies where the power gradient from most distant worker to the CEO is the steepest are even more likely to see it.
Larger orgs, with offices, can more easily move people who discuss and disrupt with politics further apart. Those smaller ones that are all remote? where everyone is on the same slack channel? Where the most distant employee to the CEO is only one or two managers apart? Yea... they're more likely to have trouble when the third place norms get too established in the company.
I'm not at all surprised to see this.
Re: “About one-third of Basecamp employees accepted buyouts today”
#977Re: “About one-third of Basecamp employees accepted buyouts today”
#978WTF Twitter? I clicked on the story. Clicked the back button. And Twitter had a big giant popup on THIS page suggesting that I install the twitter app. That had no obvious way to be removed. I have no idea how they did that. But I really hope that the advertising spam industry doesn't start abusing this to place invasive ads all over other people's pages.
Got a screenshot? What platform?
Re: “About one-third of Basecamp employees accepted buyouts today”
#979WTF Twitter? I clicked on the story. Clicked the back button. And Twitter had a big giant popup on THIS page suggesting that I install the twitter app. That had no obvious way to be removed. I have no idea how they did that. But I really hope that the advertising spam industry doesn't start abusing this to place invasive ads all over other people's pages.
You mean a modal on HN?? That has to be a bug in browser. Maybe even security bug?
Re: “About one-third of Basecamp employees accepted buyouts today”
#980Earlier quoted context omitted.
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…
The interesting question, which I don't see addressed in the comments, is how to avoid the Basecamp situation in the first place. Just to pick one thread of many to pull on, any management team that actively encourages intra-mural political discussion should think through possible consequences. It's difficult to take such rights away, as Google's experience has shown multiple times. [1] [1] https://www.nytimes.com/20…
If you don’t check the behaviour it can take over like cancer. The gossipers and narcissists hide behind activism and the activists support them as one of their own because they align with the activists goal. People who do not want to deal with these people eventually leave for places without such policy and you are stuck with all the bad actors.