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

How Basecamp Blew Up

platformer.news

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 1001 posts

Re: How Basecamp Blew Up

#191

Post by dools »

anon7725 wrote: post #58
fallenfromgrace wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It has hints of "reverse racism" and tends to dismiss that racism is an issue...and if it is an issue, racism against white people is the actual and bigger issue. That's closer to the camp of "white supremacist" or at the very least, a common defense used by white supremacist. Generally, this would be someone who is, in his position, at the very best, wilfully ignorant. I was not the one dismissed him, nor do I work…

> It has hints of "reverse racism" and tends to dismiss that racism is an issue...and if it is an issue, racism against white people is the actual and bigger issue. That's closer to the camp of "white supremacist" or at the very least, a common defense used by white supremacist. This is the problem with cultural Marxism / “wokeness”. It’s a sanctified, totalizing ideology that admits zero daylight between “100% agree…

There is no such thing as "cultural marxism", it's a term manufactured by modern libertarians to distract people with a fake culture war while they're robbed blind by corrupt politicians. Like "virtue signalling". It's also a red flag that someone is racist and ignorant, and should be called out in the same way as flat earth, climate denial or any other range of denialist mindsets.

Re: How Basecamp Blew Up

#192

Post by moduspol »

ashtonkem wrote: post #157
Tainnor wrote: post #124

Honestly, in this story everyone looks like a big child. I would maybe be more sympathetic to DHH if it wasn't the guy who was so opinionated he pushed through Rails features that everyone else disliked or co-wrote several books on company culture that are glorified ads for basecamp (although "it doesn't have to be crazy at work" is still a thought-provoking read, at least in part). I can only imagine that he might b…

> I think that, no matter your political views, if a situation gets out of hand that bad over matters that aren't even really directly related to workplace concerns, something must have gone fundamentally wrong much earlier. Remember, the proximate cause here was something that directly related to what happened at work.

No, it was just claimed to be.

It's not the case that forming a committee that's over 1/3 the size of the company to do unprompted evaluation of vendor relationships for DE&I and approval of guest speakers follows logically from, "there used to be a list of funny sounding names and management didn't handle it well."

Re: How Basecamp Blew Up

#193

Post by seriousquestion »

gowld wrote: post #166
seriousquestion wrote: post #148

white su·prem·a·cy; the belief that white people constitute a superior race and should therefore dominate society de·fund; prevent from continuing to receive funds Courtesy of the dictionary. This is not hard. Stop entertaining people who redefine words.

If it's you vs Merriam-Webster, I'll take Merriam-Webster https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/defund > : to withdraw funding from and "withdraw" does not mean "remove completely" https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/white%20supremacy > 1 : the belief that the white race is inherently superior to other races and that white people should have control over people of other races > 2: the social, economic, an…

Interesting. They added that 2nd definition just last October. Here it was prior to October 2020;

https://web.archive.org/web/20200901223507/https://www.merri...

Re: How Basecamp Blew Up

#194

Post by gowld »

seriousquestion wrote: post #140
throwawaysea wrote: post #43

This author, Casey Newton, seems to be trying to push a narrative that Basecamp damaged itself by banning politics at work. But the anecdotes in here convince me that Basecamp did the right thing. The people involved in this exchange with Singer seem unhinged - demanding that someone declare that white supremacy exists at work? This type of cultish demand-oriented discourse is unacceptable in professional organizatio…

Here's a twitch partner, just earlier today, illustrating how DEI is racist. Expect to see a lot of this; "Kinda sad, found out I was accepted into a twitch team because of my skin colour so that “diversity” can be preached & not for my values or the blood, sweat n tears I’ve put into my work. Plus then being left out of everything & watching from the sidelines continuously..." https://twitter.com/Sharesee/status/138…

It's weird to cite someone complaining about not being included, as an example of inclusion being bad. Sure, fake-DEI is bad, because it's not DEI!

Also weird for someone to complain about "because of my skin colour" when she identifies herself on Twitter as "Bajan and British" first and foremost, not anything about her "values or the blood, sweat n tears".

Re: How Basecamp Blew Up

#195

Post by Spartan-S63 »

baggy_trough wrote: post #133
pseudalopex wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Saying E comes after B doesn't mean inevitably B leads to E. And it seems likely the employee wanted to make a point about the level the company was at or the next level up. Not the top of the pyramid.

It says you're at the first step along the path to genocide. Whether or not it is inevitable is irrelevant to where the path leads.

No. It's saying that allowing any lower level of the pyramid to exist and pervade allows for further levels to be built up. Whereas if that lower level doesn't exist, it's less likely that other forms of hate will develop and subvert society. It's the frog boiling in the water. It's a cautionary tale to know when the water is heating up and how to stop it.

Re: How Basecamp Blew Up

#196

Post by dools »

jariel wrote: post #125
fallenfromgrace wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It has hints of "reverse racism" and tends to dismiss that racism is an issue...and if it is an issue, racism against white people is the actual and bigger issue. That's closer to the camp of "white supremacist" or at the very least, a common defense used by white supremacist. Generally, this would be someone who is, in his position, at the very best, wilfully ignorant. I was not the one dismissed him, nor do I work…

"It has hints of "reverse racism" " "That's closer to the camp of "white supremacist" or at the very least, a common defense used by white supremacist." This kind of gaslighthing though. "My opponent disagrees with me and is therefore a White Supremacist, or at least close to one!" If one person says 'this org is racist because of white privilege' - it's possibly contentious, but not unreasonable to suggest that this…

It's not a matter of disagreement about 2 equally valid viewpoints, it's about one side being wrong about everything following a deliberate and calculated campaign of misinformation, and the other side pointing out how wrong they are and how dangerous their ideology is.

No-one likes being told they're wrong, which is why the capitol riots happened on 6 January and Trump still got so many votes despite being an abjectly horrible president, and the head of a party that does nothing for the vast majority of its constituents.

Re: How Basecamp Blew Up

#197

Post by prepend »

threeseed wrote: post #185
throthro111 wrote: post #160

I feel bad for everyone involved. This story made me realize that working at Basecamp is not something I would want to do in the future, primarily because DHH and Fried are so egotistic. However, it also makes me face the reality that I would not want to work with many of the people that resigned. Resigning over a random employee refusing to say that "white supremacy exists" is absurd. I imagine myself working at som…

> Resigning over a random employee refusing to say that "white supremacy exists" is absurd It's not a random employee though. It's someone who is part of the Senior Leadership Team. If you deny that it exists then how can you be trusted to do something if an issue does comes up ?

Refusing to say it isn’t denying it exists. Those are different things.

If I’m trying to count to 100 and someone says “Prepend, please say that white supremacy exists.” And I respond “I’m busy counting to 100 and will not comply with your wishes.” That doesn’t mean I’m denying that white supremacy exists.

It’s odd you would interpret it that way as it’s illogical.

Re: How Basecamp Blew Up

#198

Post by prawn »

Tainnor wrote: post #177
prawn wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seems OP's reaction is like what is rife in Australia as 'tall-poppy syndrome' and cutting down prominent achievers. We collectively dislike promoters, but isn't doing something like writing a book to draw attention to your SaaS product exactly the sort of thing a founder should be doing? Especially given it worked in bringing them customers and attention. If you think they're too confident in their assertions, it's…

That doesn't imply that I have to like his self-promotion book. After all, if I'm to read a book I want to get something out of it. As I already mentioned, the book has good parts, but it reads quite jarring in many places. Also, I guess this is personal, but a little humility is good for everyone, IMHO, and doesn't necessarily contradict a healthy dose of self-confidence either. DHH seems to have little of it — at l…

This: "co-wrote several books on company culture that are glorified ads for basecamp" just doesn't seem too questionable to me. The readership made them popular books. His job, in part, is to promote his products - my interpretation of your comment was that your thoughts on his plight were swayed by him writing something that promoted his business. I find him a bit over the top, so I don't follow him on Twitter. I haven't read their books. I've used but didn't continue to use their products. But that doesn't really sway my thoughts on this recent episode.

I think there's a lot of cross-purpose arguing about it all. It's likely that they're a bit painful to work for AND that as founders they'd have concerns about their paid staff getting distracted from their mission at work.

Re: How Basecamp Blew Up

#199

Post by thrownaway564 »

prepend wrote: post #190
thrownaway564 wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The culture here is getting bad. We have an "inclusion council" that hands out these diktats. The word ban list (not blacklist!) is approaching 100 words including husband, housekeeping, normal, hacker and meritocracy. Worse part is we're a security company edit: "here" is okta, not basecamp

Why hacker?

their explanation: it's "gendered and not inclusive"
Post reply on HN