Update on Julie Horvath's Departure • Hacker News Board

Re: Update on Julie Horvath's Departure

#101

Post by cpeterso » Mon, Mar 17, 2014, 3:36 AM UTC

laureny wrote: post #21

> We know we have to take action and have begun a full investigation. While that’s ongoing, and effective immediately, the relevant founder has been put on leave, as has the referenced GitHub engineer. Pretty much a full admission that everything that Julie said is true. This is great news, but putting these people on leave seems to be too nice. It's clear that these two people obey ethics that are in direct oppposit…

> This narrows down the choices: the "founder" who is the cause for all this drama is either PJ Hyett or Tom Preston-Werner.

Julie Horvath follows both Chris Wanstrath and PJ Hyett on Twitter, but not Tom Preston-Werner (at least as shown by Twitter's "Followed by people you follow" banner). Of course, this could just be a coincidence.

Re: Update on Julie Horvath's Departure

#102

Post by vacri » Mon, Mar 17, 2014, 3:36 AM UTC

laureny wrote: post #21

> We know we have to take action and have begun a full investigation. While that’s ongoing, and effective immediately, the relevant founder has been put on leave, as has the referenced GitHub engineer. Pretty much a full admission that everything that Julie said is true. This is great news, but putting these people on leave seems to be too nice. It's clear that these two people obey ethics that are in direct oppposit…

Pretty much a full admission that everything that Julie said is true.

This is a terrible assumption to make. This line is basically saying "we're taking this seriously", because if they said anything less, then regardless of the truth of the matter, they'd be skinned alive.

Ironically, it's knee-jerk black and white comments like yours that create this kind of press release. You've already convicted them in your mind and are looking for any excuse to execute them. I mean fuck, you expect an HR person to come on board and within a month "not have let any of that get as far as it got"? Are they supposed to have invented a time-machine?

Re: Update on Julie Horvath's Departure

#103

Post by jamesaguilar » Mon, Mar 17, 2014, 3:37 AM UTC

BCM43 wrote: post #92

sitharus wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> > We know we have to take action and have begun a full investigation. While that’s ongoing, and effective immediately, the relevant founder has been put on leave, as has the referenced GitHub engineer. > Pretty much a full admission that everything that Julie said is true. > This is great news, but putting on leave seems to be too nice. It's clear that these two people obey ethics that are in direct oppposition to…

>It's pretty standard practice to place employees on paid leave while serious complaints are investigated. Employees? Sure. Founders? I've not heard of that before.

I also have never heard of a founder being put on leave. I wouldn't go quite so far as to say it is an admission that the allegations are true. But it is certainly an admission that they have merit and are not so far from reality as to be easily dismissed. I am pleased that Github is taking this seriously, and very sorry for Julie's experiences. This should never happen to anyone in our industry.

Re: Update on Julie Horvath's Departure

#104

Post by macspoofing » Mon, Mar 17, 2014, 3:37 AM UTC

mikehearn wrote: post #93

laureny wrote: post #21

> We know we have to take action and have begun a full investigation. While that’s ongoing, and effective immediately, the relevant founder has been put on leave, as has the referenced GitHub engineer. Pretty much a full admission that everything that Julie said is true. This is great news, but putting these people on leave seems to be too nice. It's clear that these two people obey ethics that are in direct oppposit…

> Doesn't appear so. They did get an HR person, but an experienced one? Not a chance. No experienced HR person would have let any of that get as far as it got. That HR person should probably be put on leave or be fired as well. The HR person has been on the job for a minimum of 31 business days and a maximum of 53. Horvath joined two years ago. Unless you are a GitHub insider, you currently are working off knowledge…

It looks like HR was involved in this case and the issue with the wife seemed have been raised. That should have been an immediate red flag to this "experienced" individual before they even got down to business of addressing any other concerns. It was a major screw-up.

Re: Update on Julie Horvath's Departure

#105

Post by courtf » Mon, Mar 17, 2014, 3:37 AM UTC

jw2013 wrote: post #58

laureny wrote: post #21

> We know we have to take action and have begun a full investigation. While that’s ongoing, and effective immediately, the relevant founder has been put on leave, as has the referenced GitHub engineer. Pretty much a full admission that everything that Julie said is true. This is great news, but putting these people on leave seems to be too nice. It's clear that these two people obey ethics that are in direct oppposit…

>>> This narrows down the choices: the "founder" who is the cause for all this drama is either PJ Hyett or Tom Preston-Werner. Any guess?

I would venture to guess Tom. I certainly don't know for sure, but he has a wife (don't know about PJ's marital status) who is herself a founder/CEO and wouldn't raise eyebrows spending time working at the Github offices.

Re: Update on Julie Horvath's Departure

#106

Post by greenyoda » Mon, Mar 17, 2014, 3:38 AM UTC

Recoil42 wrote: post #75

laureny wrote: post #21

> We know we have to take action and have begun a full investigation. While that’s ongoing, and effective immediately, the relevant founder has been put on leave, as has the referenced GitHub engineer. Pretty much a full admission that everything that Julie said is true. This is great news, but putting these people on leave seems to be too nice. It's clear that these two people obey ethics that are in direct oppposit…

>Pretty much a full admission that everything that Julie said is true. No, it isn't. It's standard operating procedure pretty much everywhere to put employees on leave while an investigation is conducted. It shouldn't be construed as an admission at all.

"I would like to personally apologize to Julie" certainly sounds like an admission that the company wronged her.

And don't lawyers frequently tell their clients not to apologize (even if they feel they ought to), since that may be construed as an admission of wrongdoing in a subsequent legal proceeding?

Re: Update on Julie Horvath's Departure

#107

Post by phazmatis » Mon, Mar 17, 2014, 3:38 AM UTC

laureny wrote: post #21

> We know we have to take action and have begun a full investigation. While that’s ongoing, and effective immediately, the relevant founder has been put on leave, as has the referenced GitHub engineer. Pretty much a full admission that everything that Julie said is true. This is great news, but putting these people on leave seems to be too nice. It's clear that these two people obey ethics that are in direct oppposit…

> ... putting these people on leave seems to be too nice. It's clear that these two people obey ethics that are in direct oppposition to the healthy growth of the company. Surely they don't want them back?

Man, talk about CSI justice. Sadly, I think this episode is a two-parter. You'll have to tune in next time, sorry!

Re: Update on Julie Horvath's Departure

#108

Post by sgrove » Mon, Mar 17, 2014, 3:38 AM UTC

vacri wrote: post #102

laureny wrote: post #21

> We know we have to take action and have begun a full investigation. While that’s ongoing, and effective immediately, the relevant founder has been put on leave, as has the referenced GitHub engineer. Pretty much a full admission that everything that Julie said is true. This is great news, but putting these people on leave seems to be too nice. It's clear that these two people obey ethics that are in direct oppposit…

Pretty much a full admission that everything that Julie said is true. This is a terrible assumption to make. This line is basically saying "we're taking this seriously", because if they said anything less, then regardless of the truth of the matter, they'd be skinned alive. Ironically, it's knee-jerk black and white comments like yours that create this kind of press release. You've already convicted them in your mind…

I'm similarly blown away that this comment is at the top. What a dangerous conclusion to jump to.

Re: Update on Julie Horvath's Departure

#109

Post by ephemeralgomi » Mon, Mar 17, 2014, 3:38 AM UTC

laureny wrote: post #21

> We know we have to take action and have begun a full investigation. While that’s ongoing, and effective immediately, the relevant founder has been put on leave, as has the referenced GitHub engineer. Pretty much a full admission that everything that Julie said is true. This is great news, but putting these people on leave seems to be too nice. It's clear that these two people obey ethics that are in direct oppposit…

> Pretty much a full admission that everything that Julie said is true.

It reads more like an admission that at least some of what Julie said is not immediately known to be untrue and that they have to check it out. Hence the, y'know, investigation.

Re: Update on Julie Horvath's Departure

#110

Post by Throwadev » Mon, Mar 17, 2014, 3:38 AM UTC

pekk wrote: post #31

almightygod wrote: post #26

This whole incident is sad. It's incredibly sad for Julie, for everyone at GitHub, for the founders, and for the alleged "crazy" founder wife who was banned from a company she probably sacrificed a lot for

I'm surprised nobody sees sexism in the way that the wife has been stigmatized.

I don't see the sexism here. If you changed her sex to male, people would be just as negative on him/her. A spouse who is not an employee, swinging their proverbial dick around (no pun intended), meddling with the company's employees, and harassing them?

I think people would hate the spouse just the same if it were a man, so I disagree with you on this.