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

Results of the GitHub Investigation

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

411–420 of 514 posts

Re: Results of the GitHub Investigation

#411

Post by kelnos »

manish_gill wrote: post #293
res0nat0r wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I did and understand everything that is going on, but reading her Twitter feed the last hour shitting on everyone and everything at Github (since they didn't find any criminal wrongdoing) doesn't make you look good or more believable, it actually does the opposite.

Yep, we should all just shut the fuck up if we feel we're wronged.

There are good and bad ways to respond to the results of an investigation. I would argue that her response falls under the latter. She's doing herself a disservice by posting stuff like this.

Re: Results of the GitHub Investigation

#412

Post by aaronem »

gfodor wrote: post #280
wankerrific wrote: post #273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think its pretty telling that this an anonymous account and that no one is will to attach their name to the Medium post.

Not really. You'd have to be an idiot to attach your name to this given the shitstorm twitter would unleash upon you for questioning the narrative. No idea if it's true but in this environment anonymity is probably the default.

> the shitstorm twitter would unleash upon you

Not to mention the fact that, assuming the writer is indeed a Github employee, the fact that it would instantly place her at grave risk of losing her job.

Re: Results of the GitHub Investigation

#413

Post by kelnos »

sheetjs wrote: post #279
kelnos wrote: post #271

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you read Theresa Preston-Werner's post (linked above), she claims that the "mistakes and errors of judgment" were completely unrelated to the harassment story, but were discovered during the harassment investigation.

That's Theresa's claim (if we are going to play he-said-she-said we might as well be consistent). The official response does not suggest that the errors of judgment were unrelated to the subject at hand

The official response doesn't say anything about the errors of judgment being related or unrelated.

That's a good point, though: from our perspective it is still just he-said/she-said (er, she-said/she-said), and I guess it will always be. I guess it just depends on who we (individually) feel is more credible.

Based on Hovarth's public behavior, I'm not feeling too great about her story...

Re: Results of the GitHub Investigation

#414

Post by zak_mc_kracken »

ender7 wrote: post #81

"We didn't do anything illegal, or that would leave us vulnerable to a lawsuit" is about the only content that this blog post contains. While Horvath characterized much of her woes as being gender-related [1], the investigation could have classified most of them as either unprovable or terrible-but-not-provably-sexist (in particular, the behavior of the Preston-Werners). I doubt it will ever be clear what actually ha…

From her blog post:

> We learned that unnamed employees felt pressured by Tom and me to work pro-bono for my nonprofit

It's really hard to take seriously the claims that "my husband did nothing wrong" when

1. He resigned. 2. She's now being accused of shady practices in her own company as well.

Re: Results of the GitHub Investigation

#415

Post by marshray »

RodericDay wrote: post #405
MarkPNeyer wrote: post #307

Earlier quoted context omitted.

i'm not sure where you're getting this. the parent referenced a movie, after posting a quote marveling at the different ways people interpret the same reality. grandparent post was talking about the need for intellectual empathy. i've seen that work wonders in my life. it's like this thread of comments shows the need for intellectual empathy in microcosm.

I agree with your parent that the reference gave the impression of having misunderstood the film It's like someone is raving about the military, and someone quotes appending Dulce et decorum est below. Not a big deal, but big enough to write a small comment making a correction, just in case.

I don't see it. The quote replied to was "how subtle and ambiguous our and others views of the same reality is".

Re: Results of the GitHub Investigation

#416

Post by kelnos »

chippy wrote: post #344
kelnos wrote: post #333

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right, but there is no actual way that you can say that something doesn't exist; you can't prove a negative. There is absolutely no other wording you can ever use. Pointing that out as some sort of indicator that it's possible that there is some evidence is a little silly, because... well, duh. Ultimately it depends on whether or not you trust the investigator to be thorough, and to be able to ferret out the truth wh…

The investigator in this case is not about uncovering the truth of everything - it's about investigating this specific case. They do not have an obligation, for example, to mention that they found taxation irregularities during their work.

... what does that have to do with anything? We're not talking about that.

Re: Results of the GitHub Investigation

#417

Post by lawnchair_larry »

sneak wrote: post #381
nailer wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you want to know if GitHub is a hostile work environment according to women who work there, take a poll of current and past female employees, including Horvath. I did. So far it's working out in GitHub's favour. But maybe I missed something, so do your own research.

https://twitter.com/nrrrdcore/status/458342995469688833 https://twitter.com/nrrrdcore/status/458347143086870528 https://twitter.com/nrrrdcore/status/458347574672388096

What a drama queen. Hard to take her seriously with these antics.

Re: Results of the GitHub Investigation

#418

Post by jamesaguilar »

001sky wrote: post #336
chippy wrote: post #326

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>if Julie wants to share this story so publicly then everyone should at least have all of the story the whole thing is crass and distasteful to my british sensibilities, but if this the future of how conflict in internet corporations is represented, then we shouldn't be surprised to see allegations from all sides. The key skills that we as audience have to develop is critical thinking, impartiality and a good sense o…

we shouldn't be surprised to see allegations from all sides. The line is drawn at "anonymous internet sources". At least in the sense of euclidean geometry, that is not a "side" of the argument as much as it is a literary device to create an infinite attack surface.

Since you don't have a means of contact in your profile, I'm just going to tell you directly. That was an incredible turn of phrase. Really nicely said.

Re: Results of the GitHub Investigation

#419

Post by kelnos »

harrystone wrote: post #243

His wife says she didn't realize that soliciting contributions from her husband's employees may not be appropriate. She pretty plainly states that it never even entered her mind. That tells me more about the atmosphere there than anything.

Yes, I agree, but I'm sympathetic: GH has always pushed the flat-hierarchy, we-are-all-peers attitude. And I think that's cool in theory, but has potentially bad side-effects like this one, where people feel pressured in situations where they viscerally know they are not peers, even if the atmosphere tries to push that idea.

Re: Results of the GitHub Investigation

#420

Post by dang »

throneaway wrote: post #375
lexcorvus wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This story (unfortunately now dead on Hacker News) claims to fill in what's missing: https://medium.com/p/d96f431f4e8e Money quote: Around the end of 2012, Julie started dating a close male friend of the cofounder’s wife and didn’t like that they were close. She asked them to stop being friends and when they would not end their relationship, Julie started telling coworkers that the wife had affairs and that the cofou…

The new Hacker News moderation team is more politically correct than it used to be. You can bet stories questioning tech-feminist narratives will be dead-ed as "non-constructive"

Pretty sure we haven't touched any of the several posts of that article. Users flagged them.

Edit: I checked. It was posted three times. First was deleted by the poster. Second was flag-killed by users. Third is still up but heavily flagged. No moderator touched any of them.

Post reply on HN