[deleted]
Julie Ann Horvath Describes Sexism and Intimidation Behind Her GitHub Exit
671–680 of 1001 posts
Re: Julie Ann Horvath Describes Sexism and Intimidation Behind Her GitHub Exit
#672Earlier quoted context omitted.
If I found out that a manager was undermining me in this way, I'd strike back and it probably wouldn't be good for me or him. Allow me to clarify: Before you make a threat (such as to fire someone) you need to make sure the threat is credible. This is for exactly the reason you say: If you openly try but fail to get rid of someone, they may take it personally and try to "fuck up your shit". If there's someone who can…
My point is that you should never threaten to fire someone. Once the decision is made, you should do it. Yes, this means you'll have to pay a severance because there is no paper trail. A typical severance (enough to cover the expected length of a job search) is a small cost, considering what you're getting in the deal: non-litigation, non-disparagement, minimal drama, and the employee moved out the same day.
it's not a threat, it's a progression
as a manager, the conversations go like this:
1 - please (do/don't do) X. Hopefully this takes care of things.
2 - I said (do/don't do) X. why the fuck are you (not doing / doing) X. Now I'm unhappy, but again, hopefully this is the end of things and the employee starts doing / not doing X.
3 - (and this is what parent was talking about; I now have an employee refusing to do what I said and not providing good reasons for said refusal.) Now the conversation is: do / don't do X again and you're fired.
it isn't a decision, it's laying out consequences. Now, between steps 2 and 3, when I become aware of the doing or not doing X, I'm now moving on to the point where I have to give pretty blunt orders. I'm going to make sure my boss and potentially a peer or two, depending on which teams this employee works for, are aware of the situation and are ok with what will happen; I think that's what michaelt is talking about. There's also, obviously, a query for extenuating circumstances that they are but I am not aware of.
Re: Julie Ann Horvath Describes Sexism and Intimidation Behind Her GitHub Exit
#673Earlier quoted context omitted.
After reading the article, it became pretty clear to me that whatever manner of "culture" github appears to be permeating internally, she was very far from it. This indicates she was a bad hire from the get-go. Hiring isn't just about talent, it's also about cultural fit, and while it's difficult to know with precision who fits a cultural dynamic, 1) such an issue is bound to arise as a company grows and 2) there had…
Isn't the point she's making that she didn't fit the culture primarily because of her gender? And that any work culture where one's gender matters is a toxic culture in itself? A workplace just filled with happy young male developers is not necessarily a healthy environment, or one that necessarily has a good culture.
I wanted to make it clear in my writing, but apparently it wasn't: I think their culture is very flawed. Period. However, that's the culture they seem to want, so that said, my judgment was only against such poor hiring decisions, which are apparent in the outcome of this situation.
Re: Julie Ann Horvath Describes Sexism and Intimidation Behind Her GitHub Exit
#674Earlier quoted context omitted.
Your only source on this story is Horvath's recounting of it, and she says it was inappropriate. By what means do we have to question her assessment of the events? In questioning her, with no other information, you're saying "I don't believe you, you've irrationally overreacted". And that can only based not on the facts of the situation, but on your personal opinions of what "women" in aggregate are like. In other wo…
When someone tells a story and there's a gap between the events they relate to you and the conclusion they draw from it, it's natural to criticize their conclusions.
Unless you were there, you can't possible know what happened. We are receiving a third-hand accounting--a TechCrunch journalist relating what Horvath told them--of events we didn't experience. For all we know, the journalist editted out a part where the "gawkers" were wolf-whistling and throwing dollar bills. The point is not that they may or many not have done that, the point is that Horvath's (diluted) account is the only one we have to go by, and to dismiss it is literally nothing but marginalizing her opinion just because she's a woman.
She says it was inappropriate, and more importantly, that it made her feel uncomfortable. You have to either accept that, or you have to call her a liar.
If you choose to call her a liar, your basis for calling her a liar is what defines you as sexist. If it's "my vast and varied dealings with the Github staff at all levels never suggested anything unprofessional ever went on there"[0], then you are not sexist. If it's because "women overreact to stuff like this", you're sexist.
And it's one way or the other. You can't say "I am not calling her a liar, but I don't believe her". That's just mealy-mouth calling her a liar. And you can't say, "I didn't experience any of the involved facts for myself, but I'm not basing it on prejudices", because again, that's just speaking out of both sides of your mouth.
[0] which, given how shitty their code is, I can't see how anyone could ever make such a claim.
Re: Julie Ann Horvath Describes Sexism and Intimidation Behind Her GitHub Exit
#675Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Who can access private company data, why, and for what reason?" This seems to me to be the major takeaway for organisations outside github from this sorry affair. I'm sort of surprised you are the only person to raise this so far. In the UK, the employee who resigned could have a successful day in an employment tribunal. And one aspect of the hearing would be privacy and the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act pr…
But you live in the UK, which is still part of Europe, where people are still people that have rights. Your only right in the USA is the right to leave.
you live in the UK where people are still people that have rights
The right to be sued for libel whenever they write something that someone else doesn't like?
Re: Julie Ann Horvath Describes Sexism and Intimidation Behind Her GitHub Exit
#676Well, there are only three Github founders, and a quick search seems to indicate that Tom Preston-Werner is the only one with a wife, Theresa: http://techcrunch.com/2013/11/27/omakase-charity-tech-indust...
I've always been suspicious of that guy because of his hyphenated name.
Re: Julie Ann Horvath Describes Sexism and Intimidation Behind Her GitHub Exit
#677Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Nebulous semi-employee with unspecified responsibilities related to a founder? This is the point that stands out for me. That the wife is not an employee of Github but claims to be able to access private company chat records, and also is able to "work" from within the office and interact with the staff. Even with allowances that company property remains company property and private chat rooms are in fact non-privat…
> the question should be asked very loud and clear... "Who can access private company data, why, and for what reason?" I am against using private github repos simply because: it's safe to assume that the NSA can access them via hardware backdoors on github's premises (as per many US ISPs), or by compromising crypto keys that github holds (as per lavabit). It's also safe to assume that github will be legally compelled…
Doesn't that apply equally to any shared hosting?
Re: Julie Ann Horvath Describes Sexism and Intimidation Behind Her GitHub Exit
#678I can't believe that no one has spotted that she is exactly the same annoying feminist that forced the company to get rid of a rug because it used the term "meritocracy". http://readwrite.com/2014/01/24/github-meritocracy-rug#awesm... Tbfh, she sounds like Adria Richards v2.0
Either way, this highlights that the founders of GitHub had every intent to run a conducive and inclusive environment. I mean, obviously they failed, but I doubt it was for lack of trying.
Re: Julie Ann Horvath Describes Sexism and Intimidation Behind Her GitHub Exit
#679Earlier quoted context omitted.
> keeping his wife in line. I have never cringed so hard in my life.
Well, not in the offensive sense of "bitch, you better behave or ima smack you", but at least something modern like "honey, when you talk to my employees and act really strange and intimidating around them, it makes things very difficult for me at work". The wife's behavior seems to be the catalyst for nearly all the drama described here.
In many marriages, there's one spouse who keeps the other in line and then there is the spouse who is kept in line. One does not simply reverse these roles.
Re: Julie Ann Horvath Describes Sexism and Intimidation Behind Her GitHub Exit
#680Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think it creates a 'hostile' atmosphere per say. Obviously if both parties are alight with the situation then it's fine for them. I think it's an inappropriate one for a workplace though. This comes down to company culture. The problem isn't the women hula hooping, a casual environment means such things will happen. People will exercise together, work on hobbies, etc. The problem is that in a work environment…
>and that means not cat-calling your co-workers. There was no cat-calling in this case, so why bring that up? I suppose you could mention also that it's not okay to rape your co-workers too. Kinda disingenuous though, isn't it? Bringing it up in the context of this story implies that it happened.
My mistake (noticed when I went back to quote the article), I misread:
> What I did have a problem with is the line of men sitting on one bench facing the hoopers and gawking at them
as
> What I did have a problem with is the line of men sitting on one bench facing them, hollering and gawking at them
But the point remains. Although it's a bit less in severity than I first realized.