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

Our No Asshole Rule

adventur.es

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 75 posts

Re: Our No Asshole Rule

#41

Post by mrottenkolber »

"Asshole" is not a class of people, it's an insult. That being said I'd rather deal with a rough-edged person than listen to crap like this. If you write something down, please make sure its intellectually valuable and reflected and not just a random polemic load of crap that could have been generated by a half-arsed algorithm.

We live in a world where algorithmic natural language generation is a real thing. I can only strongly suggest that now is the time to start communicating in an intelligent fashion because being able to express a philosophically sound thought is the only thing that distinguishes you from a machine nowadays really.

Re: Our No Asshole Rule

#42

Post by iopq »

learnstats2 wrote: post #25
wolfgke wrote: post #2

But what about employees that aren't assholes per se (in the sense that they are evil or egocentric), but just socially awkward? To give one example: A intellectually brillant employee wants to explain some complicated programming or math concepts so that the other people at the company can become better - a very noble plan. But because of their social inaptness this is considered to be rude and arrogant by the other…

In my experience, that kind of employee is dependent on good management. If they can be coached into providing help only where other team members appreciate it, then they can become a highly valuable member of the team. Or, if they are told simply to stop it by an authority figure, a person with noble intentions will normally respect that. An acceptable but perhaps tense solution. On the other hand, if they are allow…

Unfortunately, if that happened to me I would think the managers are morons and my teammates are dicks for saying that I was being an asshole.

Re: Our No Asshole Rule

#43

Post by vosper »

drzaiusapelord wrote: post #28

> We have no tolerance for dishonest, manipulative, belittling, or egocentric individuals This seems code for "I don't want an egocentric person here with more confidence than me." Honestly, it depends on the role. I want my guy who handles negotiations to be a tough character. I want my lawyer to be fearless. I want my security guards to be unafraid to assert themselves if they see something. This is what both this…

> This seems code for "I don't want an egocentric person here with more confidence than me."

I think this is entirely your projection on the article; I didn't read it that way at all. I've worked with confident, effective people (including sales people) who possess none of the negative attributes the article talks about, and are all-around nice people to be with.

Re: Our No Asshole Rule

#44

Post by ohitsdom »

drzaiusapelord wrote: post #28

> We have no tolerance for dishonest, manipulative, belittling, or egocentric individuals This seems code for "I don't want an egocentric person here with more confidence than me." Honestly, it depends on the role. I want my guy who handles negotiations to be a tough character. I want my lawyer to be fearless. I want my security guards to be unafraid to assert themselves if they see something. This is what both this…

I get your "different personalities for different roles" point, and it's a good one. But you lost me on the "niceness can't compete" argument. Why not? And to me, tough isn't the opposite of nice. Being nice doesn't mean being a pushover. It means being courteous and professional.

I'm not sure what you're implying when you say niceness has limits. Are you saying being ethical is not competitive? Because I would strongly disagree with that.

Re: Our No Asshole Rule

#45

Post by WalterSear »

kyberias wrote: post #12

It sounds to me they don't like some people for whatever the reason, tag them assholes and refuse to "tolerate" them. I've always wondered whether the criteria for an asshole is the same for each intolerant individual.

Sounds pretty assholeish to me.

Re: Our No Asshole Rule

#46

Post by shanusmagnus »

Raphmedia wrote: post #23

A no asshole rule is bullshit. What you want is a no bully rule. Being harsh is alright. The people are respect the most are those that have the balls to come up to me and say "your idea is rubbish, your point of view is stupid". Yes, this guy is an asshole. But he is a good one. What you want to avoid is the bullies. The ones that will insult you for no reason. Belittle people to feel better. Those are the ones that…

I know it's kind of popular in hacker culture to claim that you can't possibly disagree or critique without being a total dick, a la Linus, but it just isn't true. It's an excuse and nothing more. If you're in surgery or under fire in a foxhole or are storming into a burning building then perhaps you don't have mental attention to modulate your tone of voice. Otherwise, act like a professional adult. It's not that hard.

Re: Our No Asshole Rule

#47

Post by euphemize »

For those who read till the end:

  The other test is to meet their significant other. What qualities did they choose in the person with whom has the most influence over them? We call these the “asshole acid test.
I like the idea, and would love to meet every candidate's SO, but I can't imagine how this would work out well, practically speaking. I'm also thinking in reverse - what if my SO's prospective employer requested to meet me - knowingly that the hiring chances will depend on how they read my personality...I'm not sure it's a great thing to put people through.

Re: Our No Asshole Rule

#48

Post by philh »

antimagic wrote: post #29
uniformlyrandom wrote: post #13

I wonder how they determine if someone is an asshole. Sounds like a perfect opportunity to fire anyone. Because this line: > We have no tolerance for dishonest, manipulative, belittling, or egocentric individuals , made me think that this blog post was written by an asshole.

Because... you're defending the right to be dishonest, manipulative, belittling or egocentric? That's an unusual point of view.

I feel like there's a pattern of people who say "I have no tolerance for ", and use that as an excuse to be as mean as they like to whomever they like.

I don't get that impression from this post. But plausibly, uniformlyrandom isn't defending the right to be an asshole; but merely mistrusts that someone who claims not to tolerate assholes, is in fact a good judge of that.

Re: Our No Asshole Rule

#49

Post by learnstats2 »

iopq wrote: post #42
learnstats2 wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In my experience, that kind of employee is dependent on good management. If they can be coached into providing help only where other team members appreciate it, then they can become a highly valuable member of the team. Or, if they are told simply to stop it by an authority figure, a person with noble intentions will normally respect that. An acceptable but perhaps tense solution. On the other hand, if they are allow…

Unfortunately, if that happened to me I would think the managers are morons and my teammates are dicks for saying that I was being an asshole.

I think that's partly my point. A manager would hopefully recognise and deal with this situation, considerately, before the word 'asshole' was used. Then, the problem doesn't exist in the first place.

If you've reached the stage you describe, you're probably not ever going to play nicely with that team. Sorry.

Re: Our No Asshole Rule

#50

Post by jameshart »

mrottenkolber wrote: post #41

"Asshole" is not a class of people, it's an insult. That being said I'd rather deal with a rough-edged person than listen to crap like this. If you write something down, please make sure its intellectually valuable and reflected and not just a random polemic load of crap that could have been generated by a half-arsed algorithm. We live in a world where algorithmic natural language generation is a real thing. I can on…

I strongly suspect you are a Markov chain.
Post reply on HN