171–180 of 209 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Cool story, but why end it gloating over someone else's misery?
Indeed, if you hurl printers at people, there is something so wrong with you mentally, the only fair response is compassion and pity in my view.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
My anecdote is that it's all employee #1: the fish rots from the head. The gist of it is that one guy founded a company, company A, bootstrapped it, then disappeared to found another company (company B) and was busy with it for about a decade. In the meantime, company A had a non-owner CEO and went from 10ish people to 60ish and grew revenues many, many times over. Meanwhile company B got huge (though never really go…
> He mentioned at lunch one day that he wouldn't hire a non-white, non-male programmer Holy crap! I'd like to think I'd notice that someone is that terrible before I start a job, but if I heard that from a boss, I'd quit on the spot. And I'm a white male programmer.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
My anecdote is that it's all employee #1: the fish rots from the head. The gist of it is that one guy founded a company, company A, bootstrapped it, then disappeared to found another company (company B) and was busy with it for about a decade. In the meantime, company A had a non-owner CEO and went from 10ish people to 60ish and grew revenues many, many times over. Meanwhile company B got huge (though never really go…
> they would do a stack-rank 10% cut to reach the target turnover each year Does this mean leadership would rank all employees once a year and fire the bottom 10%, so they could hit a statistic? And that was before the owner came back? Obviously your story is insane and I'm sorry you had to go through that, but I can't get over this part. I think the concept of a terrible person owning a business is less shocking to…
In the owner's words, it was his way of basically taking people who were "doing fine" in that there wasn't an active reason to fire them, but who had plateau'd or something and "re-roll" to potentially get someone with a higher ceiling. This is, obviously, a completely sociopathic view of employees and people in general.
In between the lines, it was just a fear tactic to keep people "working harder".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Started a new medication some time back, Plaqunial. Turns out a very rare side effect is it makes you psychotic. The kind where sweet old grandma would come at you with a kitchen knife and dance on your grave in glee. Was extremely angry for months on it, but didn’t realize it was the medication. Then since it was working so well on my condition, completely life changing. The doctor doubled it. Was not a good week. O…
Is this satire? Plaqunial is the infamous hydroxychloroquine...
It’s an amazing drug. I was in bed 16 hours a day unable to get up. A fews months on it and I was kayaking multiple times per week.
Unfortunately side effects grew worse over time.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Quitting and chosing a better place to work is a perfectly valid way to claw your way to the top. Your top. Not their top. Changing a job is not easy; it requires strength too. It's not always the right thing to do, but it's not necessarily a sign of weakness; au contraire.
Certainly! I’m just making a statement about their expectations — not about the epistemological value of living up to them. (Probably negative.) Still, if you’re born in a country with a machismo based culture, where “opting out” is much harder, it’s good to be aware of what game is being played!
Oh man, the worst are those that pretend to be benevolent but end up firing you after a vacation. The one who writes memory-bloated code, who keeps state around, that loves to cross types has the gaul to do a single performance review after 8 months to criticize your code quality and fire you. (Recent experience) Or how about the one guy that shouts at people when they ask ANY question on why things work that way, re…
What's with the firing after vacation thing? Always puzzled me.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
congrats.
Second. My last project from hell was all "let's just get it done," with a deadline that shifted from January to May one month at a time. Eventually I pulled the pin. Pretty sure that subsequently there was a lot of "the last guy really caused us a lot of problems," gossip to the project managers but I don't care. Lots of the staff had terrible attitudes and the management cultivated such.
Because the project managers are cowards. Unwilling to tell management they have repeatedly set unrealistic expectations for them and of the staff.
Of course they blame the staff for be lazy or slacking. The reality is, they were never able to properly define and estimate the scope.
They are folks who never take accountability for their responsibilities. They blame others. Even after they did their best to fix the problems and then got blamed for them all after they left.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, this is the problem. Unprofessional, low-quality employees think employment is "king of the hill," when really it's "tides lift all boats." It only takes 1 person in a company of a hundred to completely destroy it. Allow one psychopath into your company and it'll go bankrupt or otherwise defunct within just a couple years. These folks are afraid. They know their performance is substandard. They exist by hiding t…
Your comment relates it all to bad performance. That doesn't cover the "brilliant asshole" problem though, do you think we should allow such behavior for people who show good (personal..) results?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I kinda get that they'd want to pay less if you were living in Poland, considering the cost of living Shouldn’t a company pay what a job is worth to them, not based upon what they think the employees costs are? This gets complicated fast as remote work, work from home etc all changes the equation. Does the end customer get to pay a different amount based on their location? From my experience the remote customer usu…
> Shouldn’t a company pay what a job is worth to them No, they pay just enough for you to accept working there. If your alternatives are worse than your colleagues because you don't have high-paying local options, you'll be paid less.
Now somehow when you replace "black" with "Polish", it suddenly becomes ethically okay.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> You report the incident to who you are directed to report into and are told to, "man up." Given that you also mention further down a dev getting punched, I think this statement was code for “if you don’t like what they’re saying, you should just shut them up.” Machismo-driven cultures are confusing until you realize that everyone is just expecting you to literally physically assault your way to the top, and is just…
isn’t this the definition of toxic masculinity?
Machismo is kind of just an expected output of certain game-theoretic conditions.
Street gangs, for example, are effectively corporation-like entities enacting machismo as an output of the organization — where the public face / "PR department" of the gang enacts domination/intimidation tactics upon symbolic representatives of other gangs in a way that can only be described as "machismo-driven." The same Nash equilibrium that gives rise to street gangs, also makes it so that it's [economically] Pareto-optimal for them to interact with each-other this way.
And this is despite no individual member of the gang necessarily being machismo-driven themselves. Gang members can "give rise to" corporate machismo entirely dispassionately, as an output of "just serving their role", in the same way that employees of a corporation can "give rise to" corporate profit-seeking entirely dispassionately, as an output of "just doing their job." No cog in the machine necessarily approves of what the machine as a whole is doing, but the machine does it all the same.