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

Alphabet’s Chief Legal Officer Stepping Down Amid Investigation

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 311 posts

Re: Alphabet’s Chief Legal Officer Stepping Down Amid Investigation

#161

Post by GhettoMaestro »

vkou wrote: post #8
vl wrote: post #6

> Last year, a committee of independent directors from Alphabet’s board hired a law firm to investigate its handling of allegations of sexual misconduct and inappropriate relationships by current and former executives as part of its legal defense against shareholder lawsuits over its handling of the matters, according to documents viewed by The Times. Let’s sure hope they investigated Sergey and Larry too, unlike the…

> Let’s sure hope they investigated Sergey and Larry too, unlike them, at least this guy got married to his office romantic interest. One of them, at least. Another one, whom he had a baby with, was allegedly pushed out of the firm.

Lol downvotes. The google pr force is out tonight!

Re: Alphabet’s Chief Legal Officer Stepping Down Amid Investigation

#162

Post by [deleted] »

m0zg wrote: post #157
nostrademons wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm also an ex-Googler, and was at Google when the Rosenberg affair broke. Sergey was nominally head of Google X (the reporting org that Google Glass was in) at the time. Whether he was actively doing anything other than boning his employees is another matter; I had a number of friends in X (including in Glass) and his job largely seemed to be to cheerlead various X initiatives at the time. And the role of HR and leg…

He can't be "aggrieved", because his relationship with her would also be unethical, and because _she dumped him to be with Brin_. I'm pretty sure Barra wasn't entitled to her sexual favors, so there's no leg for him to stand on in that argument. I can see how he'd be pissed off enough to leave though.

[deleted]

Re: Alphabet’s Chief Legal Officer Stepping Down Amid Investigation

#163

Post by dang »

johnhughesco wrote: post #99
johnhughesco wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Larry used to "date" Marissa Meyer. More like FOB

Why is stating facts downvoted on this crappy website?

There are infinitely many facts. They don't select themselves. Humans do that, for reasons of their own, and sometimes their reasons don't match the intended use of this website, which is curious conversation. So while facts are a nice-to-have, they're not sufficient to make for a good HN post. Other things are needed also.

https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu...

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Re: Alphabet’s Chief Legal Officer Stepping Down Amid Investigation

#164

Post by aylmao »

It's honestly more angering when figures like this think everyone else is dumb and will swallow the story that nothing is happening, it was just the right time to leave. This one is even worse, he's trying to sell himself as a wise leader leaving to see his pupils grow:

> He said that it was the “right time for me to make way for the next generation of leaders”

> In his farewell note, Mr. Drummond did not mention any of the claims.

Really? At least mention the full context around your departure. Moreover, he tries to pull this one off:

> “I know this company is in the best of hands, and I am excited for what the future holds for Google, for Alphabet and for me,”

> His departure had been telegraphed in the last few months as he sold off most of his shares in Alphabet, unloading roughly $170 million worth of company stock from November to January.

Come on. Drummond, you're leaving as consequence of the investigation around your misconduct. This is not an opportunity to try to squeeze idolatry out of. Just leave.

Re: Alphabet’s Chief Legal Officer Stepping Down Amid Investigation

#165

Post by zepto »

throwaway17_17 wrote: post #123
zepto wrote: post #75

There is nothing toxic about Google’s culture. These are normal events in any organization of this size. They are just as focussed as ever on organizing the world’s information and making it universally accessible.

Curious, are the downvotes on this comment for the comment which I assumed was sarcasm, or for the fact that a non-qualified sarcastic comment is of a type of discussion HN rules discourage?

Just to clarify, I’m not being sarcastic as such, but it is makes sense why people would consider that as a possibility.

I have tended to interpret Google in the negative over time, but I have heard the kind of statement I expressed enough times that I honestly am not sure that it isn’t as true as the more negative reads are.

Re: Alphabet’s Chief Legal Officer Stepping Down Amid Investigation

#166

Post by vecter »

d1zzy wrote: post #104
damnyou wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, it's probably not illegal, but it should still cause the exec to be fired.

He's not an exec, he's a founder (which together with Larry and Eric controls over 50% of shareholder voting power). He'd have to fire himself.

That's not entirely true. The board has the power to fire executives (that's one of the purposes of having a board, for executive oversight). You're correct in that those three could theoretically vote to change the board, but doing so also has other drastic consequences. That also takes time and process, and it's possible the board can make a move before they have the time to see that process through.

Re: Alphabet’s Chief Legal Officer Stepping Down Amid Investigation

#167

Post by celdon25 »

nostrademons wrote: post #158
tmpz22 wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "HR told me that Sergey's response to it was, 'Why not? They're my employees,'" Ayers said. "But you don't have employees for f---ing! That's not what the job is." Ooooof. That shatters the "Early on Google's culture was great!" narrative... [1]: https://www.businessinsider.com/google-sergey-brin-employees...

Not really. Eric Schmidt (also a notorious womanizer) had a saying while I was there: "More revenue solves all known problems." When everybody at the company is getting rich, they're all working on exciting problems, Fortune and Time and BusinessWeek and Playboy magazines are featuring employees on the cover, and everyone you meet is impressed at where you work, then employees are willing to overlook a large number o…

I don't think the 2016 election is a good analogy, as both candidates had their share of skeletons in the closet, with the non-winning party arguably having skeletons that were more of a national security risk than a cultural one. People seem to conveniently forget this fact though.

Re: Alphabet’s Chief Legal Officer Stepping Down Amid Investigation

#169

Post by baddox »

loganfrederick wrote: post #79

I really liked Ben Horowitz's new book "What You Do Is Who You Are". However, the only passage that I disliked and stood out to me is when he defended David Drummond for his ability to thrive at Google for a long time despite the corporate culture changing. This was after Drummond was called out publicly for abandoning his kid he had with a subordinate: https://www.law.com/corpcounsel/2018/10/25/report-alphabet-c...…

> but it's not like Google couldn't find a great legal chief who also wasn't a terrible person.

This is actually an argument I wish would come up more often in cases where prominent people are fired or lose opportunities due to misconduct. Critics invariably react as if there aren't hundreds or thousands of qualified people for the position who didn't conduct themselves inappropriately, but I would argue that there almost always were.

There are hundreds of talented directors who could direct your children's movie and never tweeted about molesting children in a movie theater.

Re: Alphabet’s Chief Legal Officer Stepping Down Amid Investigation

#170

Post by _jal »

ProAm wrote: post #131
sokoloff wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

She worked for him in the legal department . If she's asked to change departments, what's someone presumably trained and skilled in law going to do? Start coding? Run a product team? Do sales?

Right, she had affair with her boss at a company where there was a clear policy against it. What was she supposed to do? Maybe think ahead and realize this is a bad idea, OR realize there are potential consequences for making said decisions. Regardless when google found out they did not fire her, they gave her a chance to continue employment at the company. I dont know what her qualifications were but if she managed…

Dude just fades into the background, a fact she must make choices around, and anyway she must have landed OK, right?

Amazing how senior execs in powerful places selectively lose agency.

Post reply on HN