sam's pissed.
Yup. Doesn't look like there is a way back. I wonder what this will mean for the JS-experience in Rails. Rails is so big it lives outside Basecamp, but Hotwire is so tied to the company.
Changes at Basecamp
51–60 of 853 posts
Re: Changes at Basecamp
#52sam's pissed.
Sam who?
Re: Changes at Basecamp
#53Can there ever be a non-work related conversation between employees that is not a "societal and political discussion"? In the past week I have spoken to coworkers about high housing costs (bunch of us are testing the market right now), property taxes, EV rebates, weed legalization, homeless/drug use problem on the streets. All of this is apparently a fireable offense at Basecamp? People are going to say "obviously st…
> Can there ever be a non-work related conversation between employees that is not a "societal and political discussion"?
If you're tendentious enough, you can make anything political. But if you start talking about the post-colonial geopolitical implications of your coworker's son's new chocolate chip cookie recipe, expect everyone to roll their eyes and walk away.
Re: Changes at Basecamp
#54Earlier quoted context omitted.
With employees cancelling each other Can you explain what this means without using the word "cancel"?
I'll assume this question was asked sincerely and in good faith. By cancelling in this context I mean trying to ostrasize those they disagree with. Talking negatively about them, excluding them as much as possible from social and professional activities. Ignoring their advice and opinion at work. Being rude or negative when they do have to engage with them etc. In short, acting without the respect and courtesy we wou…
That's soft cancellation.
Hard cancellation is when you get others to gang up on them and go to HR to try to get them fired. Afterwards, you publicise whatever got them fired offline in the hopes that they become 'radioactive' to employers and so that they and their family fall on hard times.
I'm a little confused as to why people don't understand what "cancel" means in this context. Isn't it quite a popular topic nowadays? Is it possible that they're claiming ignorance, because they want to argue against the meaningfulness of the term?
Re: Changes at Basecamp
#55Can there ever be a non-work related conversation between employees that is not a "societal and political discussion"? In the past week I have spoken to coworkers about high housing costs (bunch of us are testing the market right now), property taxes, EV rebates, weed legalization, homeless/drug use problem on the streets. All of this is apparently a fireable offense at Basecamp? People are going to say "obviously st…
Yeah. More than questioning the ethical implications of their decision I was simply struct with a... damn that must be a boring place to work at.
Maybe they want to hire people like to work on the things the company do.
Re: Changes at Basecamp
#56Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't get what you're saying. Is there some unique intersection between the software they develop and social/political issues?
They essentially build communications software –– social software. To try and say that you can do this without ever considering social issues is strange to me, and seems like at worst, it could damage their products. For one thing, there is no shortage of examples of social products that have launched offerings without thinking how they could be abused (hello cross-Slack messaging) and had to recant quickly. But to g…
Read the whole post. They will counsel specific personals, no need for everyone to get involved.
Re: Changes at Basecamp
#57sam's pissed.
Did they say anything on their Twitter? It's protected now.
Re: Changes at Basecamp
#58Re: Changes at Basecamp
#59> No more paternalistic benefits. Cutting benefits and calling it a feature. Amazing. A lot of "work will set you free" vibes from this.
They also set out how they've paid the value of these benefits to employees instead, and have started a profit sharing plan. Looks like a better deal to me?
I don't know what Basecamp's books look like, I don't have the clairvoyance to know what they will look like in the future..
humor a speculative question for a moment: would the "better deal" have been to give employees the option of how they'd like to receive their fringe benefits versus a one-size-fits-all edict, so that those with less tolerance for the volatility of profit sharing can enjoy a bit of stability with such fringe benefits if profits decline?
Especially after, as another commenter mentioned: the tax implication of cash payout?