291–300 of 320 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Unfamiliar with IRC slang, because don't hang out on IRC. Wasn't looking for an opportunity to relitigate the whole pointless thread on this subthread.
Brigading is not IRC slang. It is web forum slang, perhaps reddit specific. I've only heard it in the reddit/HN context, never in IRC. IRC is nevertheless a popular way to 'organize' such 'brigades'.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> In running reddit, there's an interesting balance between the normal standards of professionalism... Professionalism? The CEO originally wrote: > When an employee is dismissed from employment at a company, the policy of almost every company (including reddit) is not to comment, either publicly or internally. This is because companies have no desire to ruin someone's future employment prospects by broadcasting to th…
Anyone who places any confidence in references from former employers is kidding themselves in the first place. Most employers wont give a negative reference on any employee, the liability risks are simply too high in our litigous age. Not sure why Reddit's CEO thought it was cool to put one on the Internet for the entire planet to see.
Here in Australia employers won't hold back and will provide a negative reference if appropriate.
http://www.reddit.com/r/bestof/comments/2igkke/reddit_ceo_ca...
Wonder why it was designed that way.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
He wasn't laid off - he was fired. This is the first point the CEO makes and it's an important distinction that the poster seemed to not own up to at all. Not knowing the difference between being fired and being laid off is bad - there's a pretty remote possibility that the poster's direct manager didn't own the message well and told the guy "we're letting you go" and he didn't understand he was being fired, but even…
> I was laid off. > > What was the reason?... > > > Officially: no reason... This basically reads like he was trying to dance around saying he was fired, but he was saying he got fired. You don't get laid off by yourself, and you definitely don't get a "reason".
In one case where I and others were laid off we were told it was a layoff, our severance paperwork said it was a layoff, and the government was informed (for each of us individually) that it was for cause. The motivation was to get around the legal restrictions for layoffs and avoid an increase in their unemployment insurance contribution. In another case I was the only person laid off (from a small team), it was explicitly a layoff & my severance was paid out, and I later found out that it was part of a deliberate attempt to spread fear, uncertainty, and doubt in the dev team. The company officer in question was later abruptly terminated and may have faced criminal charges.
In both of those cases you could argue by the standard you're using that I was fired instead, but I've got the legal documentation and if needed the witnesses to prove otherwise.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Disagree. Nipping the rumor in the bud that Reddit management fires for dissenting opinion has tangible value to hiring and retention, so a case could be made that Yishan was compelled to provide this response as part of his fiduciary duty. Reddit is a special case that is very pitchfork-happy when it comes to online drama, and even a mere offhand rumor will grow legs. This specific response with that level of harshn…
Tech companies fire people for dissenting opinions. I'm not sure that it's news, or even especially wrong. That's an unwritten rule of the workplace: don't question or embarrass your boss or his boss. Ever. This kid had very little credibility. Oddly enough, though his situation is overall worse now that Yishan responded, he has more. What we now have is a factual event, not speculation, and it's far more damaging th…
That you think you were "pushed out" of Google because you disagreed with the direction of G+, and that they were headed for certain failure unless they dropped everything and pivoted due to your boundless German card game experience, is not evidence that Google regularly fires those that disagree. How you disagree also matters, and your little charade on eng-misc is a legend to this day. I have no love for Google but even I am the first to acknowledge that they have created an environment wherein dissent is encouraged and welcomed and, in my brief tenure, was given ample opportunities to have my voice be heard and considered.
I will disagree wholeheartedly with you taking your experience (as flawed as your interpretation of events is) and attempting to justify firing over disagreement as a normal practice. I disagree with my boss, and his boss, and his boss all the time. I've disagreed with my director in front of people, and called him out on bullshit in front of his boss. You just don't know how to do so effectively, mchurch, which leads to embarrassing situations like the one you've been trying to pin on Google for a few years.
And yes, I am aware of the letter.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> In running reddit, there's an interesting balance between the normal standards of professionalism... Professionalism? The CEO originally wrote: > When an employee is dismissed from employment at a company, the policy of almost every company (including reddit) is not to comment, either publicly or internally. This is because companies have no desire to ruin someone's future employment prospects by broadcasting to th…
Anyone who places any confidence in references from former employers is kidding themselves in the first place. Most employers wont give a negative reference on any employee, the liability risks are simply too high in our litigous age. Not sure why Reddit's CEO thought it was cool to put one on the Internet for the entire planet to see.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But the other guy will likely struggle to get another job because of the shitstorm so he is IMO much more at risk than the CEO is.
Yes, but the CEO did it in response to a guy being stupid enough to lie about his termination on his former employer's web page. And the guy is still just a random ex-Redditor, so he can lie low for a bit - get a job in a softwarehouse that won't bother figuring out his Reddit handle, build positive references. This guy can step out of the spotlight anytime he wants.
You are calling Reddit a web page! Nice hyperbole!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Tech companies fire people for dissenting opinions. I'm not sure that it's news, or even especially wrong. That's an unwritten rule of the workplace: don't question or embarrass your boss or his boss. Ever. This kid had very little credibility. Oddly enough, though his situation is overall worse now that Yishan responded, he has more. What we now have is a factual event, not speculation, and it's far more damaging th…
It is absolutely unusual, and undoubtedly wrong, to be fired because you disagree. I disagree to the fullest extent with the project I am currently on and its overall direction and I have made that clear to my management. We've identified that opportunity to scope it better and, amazingly, my badge still works. That you think you were "pushed out" of Google because you disagreed with the direction of G+, and that the…
wtf
(this is clearly personal attack here)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If he did that, this whole thread would be about how Reddit CEO is a weasel PR-drone incapable of honest talk. Damned if you do, damned if you don't; people here are going to accuse him anyway, because it fits the David vs. Goliath narrative.
I don't think so; if he did that there would be no thread. "Former Reddit worker does an AMA; CEO talks to him privately about why he was let go" is not nearly as catchy.
Don't forget that just before Reddit's CEO commented, this guy was a hero of the thread; his comments could have started a completely different discussion.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, but the CEO did it in response to a guy being stupid enough to lie about his termination on his former employer's web page. And the guy is still just a random ex-Redditor, so he can lie low for a bit - get a job in a softwarehouse that won't bother figuring out his Reddit handle, build positive references. This guy can step out of the spotlight anytime he wants.
> being stupid enough to lie about his termination You might want to reevaluate that position. You're reflexively siding with the CEO. You don't know that he's lying and saying "I think was fired because I did this" is not lying either way anyways. I'm not saying you have to side with the ex-employee either, doing an AMA like that was pretty stupid as well. But the CEO's level of basic professionalism here leaves any…
You're right, thank you. I got carried away.