351–360 of 473 posts
it is relatively easy to apologize, and say "we will investigate". but, how does something like this happen, if it did happen, without people knowing? Ms Horvath stated she raised the issue, yet it took a public scandal to actually issue a "we will investigate" statement?
at the very least, IMO, GitHub must get rid of the problematic co-founder.
When I arrived at this thread, comment two was 'using the information available in the short techcrunch article, I'm now going to PROVE, point by point, how Horvath's claims are false.' Comment three was 'aha they issued a vague apology, this is basically a FULL ADMISSION that everything Horvath said was true!' People: when did our brains melt and spill out of our ears? There is not enough public information present…
Yes. Comments on the original TechCrunch article were equally vindicating even though that article offered no actual evidence. It's unfortunate TechCrunch and Valley Wag posted the story without first corroborating at least some piece of it. GitHub's response neither confirms nor denies any part of the story. It does say the founder's wife will no longer be allowed in the office, but that is not an admission of wrong…
I'm seeing plenty of mea culpa in this, and that's good. They could have responded far worse, and only slightly better.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A coworker showing up uninvited to her house and making an awkward and uninvited advance, or systematically reverting commits as vengeance. I made a vague statement, but I think "reverting a commit" is definitely minimizing what she claims happened
The only real issue GitHub can address here is harassment during work. I don't recall reading about an uninvited advance, so if this is something new you know about could you dump a citation here. I do recall a home visit which was 'awkward' and the offending party 'hesitated' to leave. That stuff happens, in and outside of work. Remember the parties here are emotionally invested and biased. We should not consider su…
a very nice apology, but it cannot be enough. i hope some specific action will be taken. but somehow, i am doubtful. it is relatively easy to apologize, and say "we will investigate". but, how does something like this happen, if it did happen, without people knowing? Ms Horvath stated she raised the issue, yet it took a public scandal to actually issue a "we will investigate" statement? at the very least, IMO, GitHub…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Actually of all of these the last one is the only one I think your counter is flat out wrong (all the others seem plausible enough). Why? Because gawking at other co-workers (regardless of genders) in a casual environment is not ok. In a casual work environment people often do light exercise, and they need to feel comfortable to do that without being turned into sex objects. I would hope the men in question have enou…
> In a casual work environment people often do light exercise Could you elaborate on this? In the work environments I've been in, people go to the gym or outside to work out. I've never been in a work environment where it's acceptable to do your exercising in the office space. What are you talking about -- yoga, bicep curls, jogging, jumping jacks? I've worked at extremely liberal companies but that kind of stuff doe…
My workplace has people doing yoga and dance classes in meeting rooms over lunch.
And if you started hanging around the meeting rooms to ogle the people doing it you'd be having some conversations about your workplace behaviour.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Feminism is a cultural Marxist ideology which tries to explain the world through the lens of class conflict - an overclass (male) which is oppressive and therefore evil and an underclass (female) which is oppressed and therefore good. This is why it is not considered oppression when men die young or go to prison more often than women and it is not a problem when men are underrepresented in higher ed - men can't be op…
You have not the faintest trace of an idea what feminism or Marxism are. This is the most idiotic thing I have read all week. OK, it's Monday morning, but I give it a good chance to stand...
As for feminism, what's your definition, and do you think other people are practicing that definition in particular? Look at tumblr posts discussing patriarchy theory sometime; somewhere amidst the paranoid depressed teenagers is a pretty well-defined belief system, and it's not yours anymore.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> GitHub's response neither confirms nor denies any part of the story. Well, they do say: 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. The founder’s wife discussed in the media reports has never had hiring or firing power at GitHub and will no longer be permitted i…
Yup. This, to me, is a partial admission of guilt. Why else would they take such harsh, immediate action to throw him under the bus?
In both cases, they wouldn't want him having any potential influence on the investigation. To do that, his power within the company needs to be suspended until a conclusion is reached. The parties investigating (likely HR and the other founders) must be able to do their job without fear of retaliation from the accused founder, that would taint the decision.
Julie was banging a co-worker so why is she acting surprised when drama happened ? I don't get it.
I work for a large, bureaucratic company. The only restrictions on dating (and we have a ton of HR rules) is about reports. As long as you neither of you report to each other or have any influence on position etc., corporate has no problem with dating. I can't imagine a startup caring unless you actually cause the drama, and this doesn't sound like that case. Grow up.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Actually of all of these the last one is the only one I think your counter is flat out wrong (all the others seem plausible enough). Why? Because gawking at other co-workers (regardless of genders) in a casual environment is not ok. In a casual work environment people often do light exercise, and they need to feel comfortable to do that without being turned into sex objects. I would hope the men in question have enou…
> In a casual work environment people often do light exercise Could you elaborate on this? In the work environments I've been in, people go to the gym or outside to work out. I've never been in a work environment where it's acceptable to do your exercising in the office space. What are you talking about -- yoga, bicep curls, jogging, jumping jacks? I've worked at extremely liberal companies but that kind of stuff doe…
I've done some minor (sedentiary) exercises in the office. For something that requires a bit more space, I wouldn't do it next to someone's desk of course. I don't know what Githib's office layout is like, but the way I read the hula hooping, it sounded like it was outside, in a courtyard or roof terrace maybe, or in a recreation area.
> It's an unusual thing to do, so it will draw eyes.
There's still a big difference between attention and gawking.
I've seen plenty of other recreational activities in offices, like playing darts, pool, computer games, etc. I don't see hula hooping as particularly out of the ordinary. And gawking at your co-workers is just rude.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> and tell the women if they want to hula hoop, do it some place more private. Indeed. And just in case men still gawked at them, she could have brought some free niqab to work for them to wear. http://www.jesusandmo.net/strips/2013-09-18.png
Eh, I think you missed my point. The point of talking to the women isn't to help the men exercise better restraint (which extrapolated to an extreme would require a niqab). It's that if the women are doing something in the office, out in the open that people stopping to watch would make other people feel uncomfortable, then perhaps it shouldn't be done out in plain view of everyone. Like, if you are trying to have a…