Earlier quoted context omitted.
>>> 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?
Tom is married. Is PJ?
Update on Julie Horvath's Departure
131–140 of 473 posts
Re: Update on Julie Horvath's Departure
#132This is the best possible response GitHub could have done given the circumstances.
Exactly. This is what I needed to hear, as a 3rd-party fan of Github's product, who is concerned by Julie's allegations. I don't know who is in the wrong, and I want to know the truth, and I hope Github can solve these problems. This statement doesn't downplay; this statement doesn't evade, and that's what this situation warrants: a serious and sincere investigation.
Re: Update on Julie Horvath's Departure
#133Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think it would be somewhat different if she were an actual employee.
So it's not sexism as long as it is against a non-employee? What kind of sense does that make?
One way or another, an employee has to be part of the workplace - it's their job. An non-employee doesn't have to be there, so access to the workplace is a privilege (and one that not all employers permit). When a non-employee misuses that privilege (e.g. by getting the the way of employees doing their work), it can and should be revoked.
Moreover, making mistakes in the context of misusing a privilege can and should carry greater stigma than making those same mistakes in some other contexts.
Re: Update on Julie Horvath's Departure
#134Now, what does "put on leave" mean? Is that "suspended with pay"? "Stay low until the dust settles"? Or, "terminated after further review"?
It means just that! Github have a very fine line to walk. They don't have traditional shareholders to make happy. At the end of the day, all they have is their brand to protect. Ask Microsoft how important their brand is after releasing Windows ME. Or Blackberry just after the iPhone came out. Clearly something has happened, but they have to not only find out what happened, but to also be transparent and show that th…
"At the end of the day, all they have is their brand to protect."
They also need to protect their company from a potential lawsuit.
Re: Update on Julie Horvath's Departure
#135Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 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.
Precisely, it "looks like" HR was involved. Can you say with certainty this person, hired in Jan. 2014, was involved? And can you say with certainty that this person could have prevented this? Again, unless you're a GitHub insider (are you?), the answer is no. At the moment, no one on HN knows anything. It's entirely possible this was an HR issue, but specifically calling for the HR person to be suspended or fired, given our collective total ignorance, is a spiteful and bizarre declaration directed at someone the original poster does not know. These are real people, and HN comments – particularly top comments – can influence decisions.
Re: Update on Julie Horvath's Departure
#136That non-employee spouses are allowed on company property to the extent that the CEO has to acknowledge it (and put an end to it) smacks of an unprofessional environment. Ugh.
Re: Update on Julie Horvath's Departure
#137The founder’s wife discussed in the media reports has never had hiring or firing power at GitHub and will no longer be permitted in the office. The fact that she was married to someone who did have hiring or firing power and WAS permitted in the office means she DID have (defacto) hiring or firing power. I wonder what the ramifications are, legal-wise? Obviously the founder could be sued, especially if he was allowin…
Might want to tighten that logic up a bit.
Plenty of founder's spouses are allowed in and have been allowed in our offices. None of them had any hiring or firing power.
Re: Update on Julie Horvath's Departure
#138Usually there are two sides of the story, but the fact that a non-employee (wife of co-founder) exercised so much power and meddled in internal office politics in the way that she did, it was hard to see how GitHub could even claim a reasonable stance. They screwed this up big time. This is a good response.
Not usually...ALWAYS. There is another side here. Github has just realized they have nothing to gain by defending.
Julie made two sets of allegations against Github. The first has to do with her personal dealings with the founder and his wife and the HR department. The second with general harassment of women at Github. Github so colossally screwed up the former, they may have to concede, by default, the latter.
Re: Update on Julie Horvath's Departure
#139Earlier quoted context omitted.
GitHub is known to have a dubstep and IPA culture. If they want to be a standard bearer for feminism in tech, the transition is going to be difficult and they are going to take some hits. The two cultures don't mix well. It sounds like GitHub is going to have to become more stale and corporate to survive as a larger company, which is inevitable, but hastened by their own choices.
> GitHub is known to have a dubstep and IPA culture. What point are you trying to make here? Are you a classical music and hefeweizen type of employee typically? Or maybe based out of Seattle, in which case you'd prefer a more grunge/PBR culture?
Here in Seattle we like IPA so much, we invented a dark faux-IPA style called CDA (Cascadian Dark Ale). And no one listens to grunge anymore.
Re: Update on Julie Horvath's Departure
#140Earlier quoted context omitted.
Getting mad at people having harmless fun isn't normal, but on feminism it is...
Yeah, rage against feminism... the radical notion that women are people.
Fun fact: White Nationalists define themselves as a movement to end the genocide of white people. Therefore, if you oppose White Nationalism, you support the genocide of white people. That's how definitions work, right?