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

Linda Sandvik Resigns As Director Of Code Club

gist.github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 85 posts

Re: Linda Sandvik Resigns As Director Of Code Club

#51

Post by ossreality »

kjksf wrote: post #44
tptacek wrote: post #28

I probably don't agree with Sandvik about Google's complicity, but that doesn't matter. Silencing her to accommodate a company sponsor is both unethical and counterproductive. There are forms of criticism that are intrinsically not compatible with being a director. If Sandvik was criticizing Google's participation with "Code Club" or making claims directly relevant to the project, that would be germane to the board.…

It doesn't matter that what she says is a lie? It's interesting how you twist yourself into a pretzel (you "probably", maybe, a little bit, think that what she says about the sponsor is a lie) to end up with the conclusion that her actions are somehow justified and the board is committing some terrible crime of censorship. The validity of her complains is very much the core of the issue. She only gave one example (th…

>and the consensus around that is that it's a lie.

What the fuck consensus are you talking about?

Re: Linda Sandvik Resigns As Director Of Code Club

#52

Post by ossreality »

chc wrote: post #39
smikhanov wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They have neither the obligation nor the right to demand anybody in the organization, Linda or whomever, to behave in any manner when not "on the clock." Of course they do. A company (that board ultimately represents) is not a human being and it can't have opinions on certain things, but it can has something resembling ethos, enforced by the employees. Anyone joining a company does so voluntarily, and can expect cons…

Mozilla ousted Eich because a vocal group was calling for his head. They knew about his donation for years and didn't care. The decision was pragmatic, not ethical.

Do you say crap like that to try to convince yourself, or...?

Re: Linda Sandvik Resigns As Director Of Code Club

#53

Post by facepalm »

viraptor wrote: post #17
facepalm wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why should a sponsor finance a project that tells people the sponsor is evil? I don't really see the problem here. Two parties disagree, so they go separate ways. End of story.

You should be always able to criticise companies/organisations you depend on. Otherwise, why would they improve anything for you? Taking an example on a bigger scale: you should be able to openly criticise some actions of the government, even if you're receiving benefits.

Are you employed? Could you tell us some things you really dislike about your company? (Giving your real name and your employers real name)

Rolling with the government example: should the government be obliged to fund communists (or other people who think the current government is evil)?

Re: Linda Sandvik Resigns As Director Of Code Club

#54

Post by facepalm »

escape_goat wrote: post #37
paulhauggis wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From Google's perspective, why would I want to sponsor a group that thinks I am evil (and spreading this opinion around)? If I was sponsoring a company/group (IE: paying them money) and they said anything negative about me, I would drop them in a second. If they really don't like Google, they can deny their money and press as a result of the sponsorship. They didn't and then the director thought it was okay to spread…

It's true that the world doesn't work that way, in the sense of natural law: it is neither inevitable nor predictable that one will be able to express any opinion without consequences, and as you note, were you Google, one would not be able to express a negative opinion of Google without there being any negative consequences. I have to concede this point because your own opinion on the matter might well go into a (ne…

If she thinks Google is so evil she shouldn't (indirectly) work for them.

Re: Linda Sandvik Resigns As Director Of Code Club

#56

Post by facepalm »

ascendantlogic wrote: post #8
facepalm wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why should a sponsor finance a project that tells people the sponsor is evil? I don't really see the problem here. Two parties disagree, so they go separate ways. End of story.

They don't have to. But if a sponsor is doing something that someone fundamentally disagrees with, they shouldn't be told to shut their mouths so the money keeps rolling in. That's called corruption.

Um no that is not called corruption. Corruption is siphoning away money and other perks in an illegal way.

Re: Linda Sandvik Resigns As Director Of Code Club

#57

Post by adamors »

kjksf wrote: post #44
tptacek wrote: post #28

I probably don't agree with Sandvik about Google's complicity, but that doesn't matter. Silencing her to accommodate a company sponsor is both unethical and counterproductive. There are forms of criticism that are intrinsically not compatible with being a director. If Sandvik was criticizing Google's participation with "Code Club" or making claims directly relevant to the project, that would be germane to the board.…

It doesn't matter that what she says is a lie? It's interesting how you twist yourself into a pretzel (you "probably", maybe, a little bit, think that what she says about the sponsor is a lie) to end up with the conclusion that her actions are somehow justified and the board is committing some terrible crime of censorship. The validity of her complains is very much the core of the issue. She only gave one example (th…

As someone who hasn't a clue about this whole situation, can you give an example of one of these "vicious lies" that she was spreading about Google?

I tried googling it, but couldn't even find any statements about Google.

Re: Linda Sandvik Resigns As Director Of Code Club

#58

Post by jlarocco »

facepalm wrote: post #4
simondedalus wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You cannot have a healthy society if only the powerless are allowed to criticize the powerful. She isn't even resigning in protest of Google's involvement, but the board's forbidding her to criticize any of Google's actions.

Why should a sponsor finance a project that tells people the sponsor is evil? I don't really see the problem here. Two parties disagree, so they go separate ways. End of story.

Not saying it doesn't make it not true.

If Google doesn't like people calling them out on it then they should stop doing it. Honestly, it seems pretty childish of them to threaten to pull sponsorship because somebody called them on their shit.

Re: Linda Sandvik Resigns As Director Of Code Club

#59

Post by ryandrake »

Avenger42 wrote: post #20
mnarayan01 wrote: post #12

> "I do not want to get into the specifics of any particular corporation. Nonetheless, it’s worth restating that the Code Club board believe X are a tremendous partner. As a member of the board I am completely aligned with that view." > I'm not comfortable with lying and so it is in my best interest to resign. I'm not sure what part of that statement would be a lie?

I'd think it would be this part: "As a member of the board I am completely aligned with that view." If she were asked to stop at "the board believe X are a tremendous partner", then as a member of the board, she'd be implying the last sentence, but not actually saying it. (I couldn't comment on whether or not she'd be fine with the implication either.)

Serious question: Are all members of a company's board typically expected unanimously agree ("align") with everything the company they direct does?

Re: Linda Sandvik Resigns As Director Of Code Club

#60

Post by schoen »

kghose wrote: post #40

Here's a thought. If you think google is evil because of surveillance should you not only refuse to use gmail (and other google products) but also refuse to send email to gmail addresses, because you don't want to support them?

This is a pretty real, concrete concern.

http://mako.cc/copyrighteous/google-has-most-of-my-email-bec...

(By the way, you can have this concern without thinking that Google is "evil": for example, you might think that it's risky to have so much e-mail in one centralized place and want Internet services to be redecentralized.)

Post reply on HN