[flagged]
The Early Days of Valve from a Woman Inside
41–50 of 56 posts
Re: The Early Days of Valve from a Woman Inside
#42Earlier quoted context omitted.
Agreed, how many marketing people can you name from Hollywood? Me, zero. But you can probably name some of the people who created the movie (actors, directors, producers, musicians, etc....)
I don't know many producers, maybe with the exception of the Broccoli family who are producing James Bond :) I know some directors of photography, though, because their work is defines an aesthetic characteristic of movies. However I was/am a film buzz for a long time and don't think the layman will know any directors of photography. Related it's also interesting that in German the directory of photography is only ca…
The (film) camera dept, led by the cinematographer, encompasses the camera operators, the electricians led by the Gaffer, the grips led by the key grip, and the camera assistants which includes loaders and focus pullers.
Re: The Early Days of Valve from a Woman Inside
#43The author has the conclusion that she was wiped from the history books because she's a woman. But her husband worked almost the exact same amount (if not more - because he was always a full time employee.) and he got equally erased from the history books. Competitive environments can be cutthroat and she and her husband let Gabe become the face of the company because they left.
Yours is an off-color take that does a disservice to the HN readership. I'm saddened that it's currently the top comment.
Here's what I saw:
As the months went on and Valve's costs continued to escalate, it became clear that Mike and I were maxing out on our financial commitment. Rather than renegotiate the contract with Sierra, Gabe, who had started at Microsoft much earlier than Mike and me, began funding the ongoing development costs, set up as a loan against future company profits.
..
By the summer of 1999, Mike was researching trawler yachts, I was immersed in figuring out Valve's potential business opportunities, and Gabe was doing deep thinking, leading the team and communicating with customers. In the meantime, because of the way Gabe and Mike had structured the ownership, where employees could earn equity over time, Mike's and my ownership stake was effectively shrinking.
..
In a nine-page document, I proposed that Valve and Amazon team up to create a new online entertainment platform. I scaled the business opportunity within four years at $500 million dollars. The gist of the idea was to create a made-for-the-medium platform that would bring users together in a sticky, compelling entertainment experience, with digital and offline content sales. I wanted Amazon's financial backing as a way to gain first mover advantage against Microsoft and Electronic Arts, then the major PC games players. I didn't see a role for Sierra. If pushed, we wouldn't create any new games ourselves, and instead would team with outside developers so that they could distribute content not subject to an 85% publishing fee. At the time, I considered it an act of rebellion against the traditional publishing dynamic where independent developers took on huge risk, and the big publishing houses reaped the rewards.
..
We had a great discussion, and a couple of weeks later, a champagne bottle appeared at Valve’s door.
It was exhilarating and scary at the same time. We had an offer from Amazon for a minority stake, but the dynamics within the company were tricky. Amazon could help propel Valve to the next level, but the partnership would not be without costs. Valve’s culture was still evolving. A partnership with a major outside player could help but it could also hurt what we’d all built.
It was after the Amazon offer that Mike revealed to Gabe that he wanted to leave. With an offer in-hand, it didn’t take long for us to figure out the outline of a deal.
..
As I look back on the huge success Valve has become, I'm proud of what the team accomplished. I'm also proud of the work I did while recognizing that my biggest contributions to Valve's business went largely unnoticed and unrecognized within the industry. Part of that was due to the bro culture of the software business, part of it was that I receded to support my husband in a partnership where he was effectively the lesser partner, and part of it was that women, especially in tech, often seem to disappear when the story gets told.
..
I know that Valve wouldn't have been successful without Mike. It wouldn't have been successful without Gabe. And it wouldn't have been successful without me. A friend of mine who knows the full story once said to me, "you were a founding partner" and in hindsight, I agree. From the beginning, I invested time, treasure and industry expertise to make the company a huge success.
Mike Harrington (the other cofounder) and his wife Monica (the author) didn't leave, they were squeezed out, due to their contract shrinking the equity they owned, "because of the way Gabe and Mike had structured the ownership".
-
Even though she contributed considerable capital and was the one who sealed the deal with Amazon to create Steam, that wasn't enough to overcome the rampant sexism in tech (demonstrated by the actions of the men around her), so her contribution was erased from history.
All that matters in (American) capitalism is who has the most money. Labor falls second to that. I've experienced this several times in my own career. Also losing out through agism, not selling my strengths well enough and not protecting myself from financial losses. It would have been doubly hard without the random privilege of being a white middle class male.
This is why your take sounds right, but is only part of the whole story, conveniently sweeping injustice under the rug to preserve your own ideology, rather than raising awareness to help others avoid becoming victims in the future.
And your take is amplified on the national stage, at the center of the current political debate, creating an even more insufferable climate of denial for those who are already suffering under the aftermath of US colonial patriarchy.
Re: The Early Days of Valve from a Woman Inside
#44The author has the conclusion that she was wiped from the history books because she's a woman. But her husband worked almost the exact same amount (if not more - because he was always a full time employee.) and he got equally erased from the history books. Competitive environments can be cutthroat and she and her husband let Gabe become the face of the company because they left.
This article contains 7000 words and exactly one paragraph is about being a woman at Valve, mostly it's just a depiction of the early days there and how Gabe ended up as the sole remaining founder. I truly doubt you read the article.
Re: The Early Days of Valve from a Woman Inside
#45What really struck me was how OK Microsoft seemed to be with her moonlighting for Valve, basically working for a competitor (albeit a small one) directly in a role that was also her role in Microsoft. Pretty much unheard of in FAANGs today. You can't so much as breathe on an external project today without FAANG claiming IP ownership over anything and everything you breathe on. Imagine working for Apple and telling yo…
Anyone planning to moonlight while working at a big company should consult a lawyer first, but Microsoft has very employee-friendly policies in general.
They still do (at least as of a few years ago, which was when I left).
Out of all tech companies I’ve seen, their moonlighting policy is by far the most permissible one. You fill out a short form, they review it fairly quickly, and then you get an official “you are good to go, this is your project, we aren’t going to have any claims against in the future”email.
I am yet to see anyone who got a rejection on that form (but I also don’t know anyone who would attempt to send the form for their personal project that would be a blatantly direct and significant competitor of a big moneymaker MSFT product).
Re: The Early Days of Valve from a Woman Inside
#46The author has the conclusion that she was wiped from the history books because she's a woman. But her husband worked almost the exact same amount (if not more - because he was always a full time employee.) and he got equally erased from the history books. Competitive environments can be cutthroat and she and her husband let Gabe become the face of the company because they left.
She makes no claim about being wiped 'because she's a woman'. Her anecdote is that another woman 'essentially said that the only other woman during her tenure there was an office manager'. She is citing, with video evidence, a case where her omission seemed an almost deliberate wipe, rather than an accidental or deliberate omission.
Re: The Early Days of Valve from a Woman Inside
#47The author has the conclusion that she was wiped from the history books because she's a woman. But her husband worked almost the exact same amount (if not more - because he was always a full time employee.) and he got equally erased from the history books. Competitive environments can be cutthroat and she and her husband let Gabe become the face of the company because they left.
Yours is an off-color take that does a disservice to the HN readership. I'm saddened that it's currently the top comment. Here's what I saw: As the months went on and Valve's costs continued to escalate, it became clear that Mike and I were maxing out on our financial commitment. Rather than renegotiate the contract with Sierra, Gabe, who had started at Microsoft much earlier than Mike and me, began funding the ongoi…
> Part of that was due to the bro culture of the software business, part of it was that I receded to support my husband in a partnership where he was effectively the lesser partner, and part of it was that women, especially in tech, often seem to disappear when the story gets told.
Why is sexism being conflated with cutthroat business decisions?
She and her husband didn't make the cut - doesn't mean that she was specifically excluded because of her gender. Look, the fact that she then mentioned "... privilege of being a white middle class male" made it very clear that she wanted sexism as a key ragebaiting element.
As the article author relied on sexism as the concluding answer, there's nothing wrong to call her out on it.
Re: The Early Days of Valve from a Woman Inside
#48The author has the conclusion that she was wiped from the history books because she's a woman. But her husband worked almost the exact same amount (if not more - because he was always a full time employee.) and he got equally erased from the history books. Competitive environments can be cutthroat and she and her husband let Gabe become the face of the company because they left.
This article contains 7000 words and exactly one paragraph is about being a woman at Valve, mostly it's just a depiction of the early days there and how Gabe ended up as the sole remaining founder. I truly doubt you read the article.
That's a pretty lame response. If I hadn't read the article, how would I know she wasn't always a full time employee but became one. (If I hadn't, I wouldn't have said her husband was always a full time employee) It's buried halfway through that she did switch eventually. Maybe respond to the content of my argument.
In fact the article was a fascinating look at the inside of how Valve started, but the conclusion did not fit with her own story of what happened.
Re: The Early Days of Valve from a Woman Inside
#49The author has the conclusion that she was wiped from the history books because she's a woman. But her husband worked almost the exact same amount (if not more - because he was always a full time employee.) and he got equally erased from the history books. Competitive environments can be cutthroat and she and her husband let Gabe become the face of the company because they left.
She makes no claim about being wiped 'because she's a woman'. Her anecdote is that another woman 'essentially said that the only other woman during her tenure there was an office manager'. She is citing, with video evidence, a case where her omission seemed an almost deliberate wipe, rather than an accidental or deliberate omission.
> I’m also proud of the work I did while recognizing that my biggest contributions to Valve’s business went largely unnoticed and unrecognized within the industry. Part of that was due to the bro culture of the software business, part of it was that I receded to support my husband in a partnership where he was effectively the lesser partner, and part of it was that women, especially in tech, often seem to disappear when the story gets told.
Nope the second and last sentence are pretty clear.
Re: The Early Days of Valve from a Woman Inside
#50Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yours is an off-color take that does a disservice to the HN readership. I'm saddened that it's currently the top comment. Here's what I saw: As the months went on and Valve's costs continued to escalate, it became clear that Mike and I were maxing out on our financial commitment. Rather than renegotiate the contract with Sierra, Gabe, who had started at Microsoft much earlier than Mike and me, began funding the ongoi…
> Part of that was due to the bro culture of the software business, part of it was that I receded to support my husband in a partnership where he was effectively the lesser partner, and part of it was that women, especially in tech, often seem to disappear when the story gets told. Why is sexism being conflated with cutthroat business decisions? She and her husband didn't make the cut - doesn't mean that she was spec…
I just want to clarify that I was the one who said "privilege of being a white middle class male", not her.
There's a lot of room for misinterpretation in long articles and comments, and risk of ragebaiting, as you pointed out.
But the reason I came down hard on the parent commenter is that after reading the whole article, they basically said that her being a woman had nothing to do with her treatment.
I've heard that veiled sexism my whole life, and racism, and agism, today it's classism.
What the parent may not realize is that by writing off her story so dismissively, they made her point. It's clear for the rest of us to see.
But if the rest of us let that stand, then it perpetuates a culture of ignorance.
There's been a lot of perpetuating these last few decades.
Which is why in 2024, despite all of our technology and progress, we are facing a presidential election between a woman and a man who openly expresses every ism and still gets 50% of the vote.