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

Scammed By A Silicon Valley Startup

medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

571–580 of 619 posts

Re: Scammed By A Silicon Valley Startup

#571

Post by MichaelBurge »

ryguytilidie wrote: post #554
wpietri wrote: post #499

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I cannot quite fathom the confusion of ideas that results in your comment here. What does a "right" to know something mean? Apparently you think that kelukelugames has the right to force Penny Kim to make public statements that would put her at the risk of a major lawsuit. Can kelukelugames compel this of everyone who has a bad employer experience? By what mechanism is the right enforced? What are the penalties if ke…

So to recap: "I cannot fathom what you mean" "Apparently you think that kelukelugames has the right to force Penny Kim to make public statements that would put her at the risk of a major lawsuit. Can kelukelugames compel this of everyone who has a bad employer experience? By what mechanism is the right enforced? What are the penalties if kelukelugames right to know is not enforced?" Wait so is it that you don't under…

When you say, "X has a right to Y", a reasonable interpretation of that is, "Someone(Z) is punished if X is denied access to Y".

For example, I could say I have a right to structurally secure buildings. If the floor of the mall falls apart underneath me, I can sue them for damages for not obeying the building code. If the mall's owners refuse to pay, the police will storm their house to extract payment(and if they resist, they could be shot). The police could end up shooting someone to enforce this right.

When you say, "This commenter has a right to Penny's information", a reasonable interpretation is, "Penny or any other person declining to support this right and provide this information will be punished or hurt in some way."

It's specifically that word "right" that you used that's in question. It makes me think of "enforcement", and I don't consider the right you described to be worthy of enforcement.

Re: Scammed By A Silicon Valley Startup

#572

Post by darkenedgy »

Theodores wrote: post #335
GuiA wrote: post #14

Welcome to the club. It's pretty much a rite of passage here to spend some time with a psychopath VC, a completely self absorbed CTO with a rich investor dad that fuels his fantasies, or an idiotic CEO with an ego problem, and to pay the price for it (just time if you're lucky, time+money if you're not). I've encountered this myself several times (down to the CEO using hire fast fire fast as a mantra), and judging fr…

> a psychopath VC, a completely self absorbed CTO with a rich investor dad that fuels his fantasies, or an idiotic CEO with an ego problem, and to pay the price for it https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cluster_B_personality_disorder... For some reason we are not educated about this. We learn it the hard way by being taken in with what seems a good opportunity, then getting abused and then going our own way. We naively be…

witch hunt much?

obviously, there are personality traits and disorders which predispose a person to doing bad things. But that isn't a reason to assume that's what happened here, unless you happen to be that person's licensed psychiatrist.

It doesn't take a mental disorder to be shitty.

Re: Scammed By A Silicon Valley Startup

#573

Post by inferiorhuman »

seabird37 wrote: post #200
inferiorhuman wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, we should out bad actors. But we should also avoid witch hunts. I agree with pluma 100% here. Plausible deniability is important as there are always at least two sides to every story. That said, Penny's account of life at the mystery startup sounds startlingly like that of my experience at Motionloft many years ago. The difference there is that the (ex-)CEO was convicted, and my experience was corroborated by an…

I loved the idea of MotionLoft, FWIW

I wasn't crazy about the idea, but the stack was interesting (and gave me some great learning opportunities). Ultimately Motionloft was more marketing than tech driven and I bailed right around the time Mills hoovered up all the money.

Re: Scammed By A Silicon Valley Startup

#574

Post by wpietri »

ryguytilidie wrote: post #554
wpietri wrote: post #499

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I cannot quite fathom the confusion of ideas that results in your comment here. What does a "right" to know something mean? Apparently you think that kelukelugames has the right to force Penny Kim to make public statements that would put her at the risk of a major lawsuit. Can kelukelugames compel this of everyone who has a bad employer experience? By what mechanism is the right enforced? What are the penalties if ke…

So to recap: "I cannot fathom what you mean" "Apparently you think that kelukelugames has the right to force Penny Kim to make public statements that would put her at the risk of a major lawsuit. Can kelukelugames compel this of everyone who has a bad employer experience? By what mechanism is the right enforced? What are the penalties if kelukelugames right to know is not enforced?" Wait so is it that you don't under…

> you literally are making up my point?

Those are how rights work: through obligation and enforcement. A right to know is a positive right [1], which means other people are compelled to provide it for you. E.g., I have a legal right to know the financials of publicly traded companies. If a company fails to honor my right, the SEC will come after them. First with lawyers, then with people with guns.

> Oh hey, another thing I didn't do!

I was referring to the behavior I was originally objecting to. But I'm not sure you didn't do that, because your point on "rights" seems to imply that Penny Kim is obligated to do more.

If you would like to make clear what you actually meant, I'd be glad to read it.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_and_positive_rights

Re: Scammed By A Silicon Valley Startup

#575

Post by wpietri »

ryguytilidie wrote: post #551
wpietri wrote: post #532

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly. It strikes me as the same sort of entitlement dynamic that so many open source project maintainers face. "You gave me a free thing? Well it's wrong and you should give me a much better free thing. For free!" I don't mind people wanting things. We all want things. But I think it's a problem when that crosses the line into expectation or demand.

Where exactly do you believe I "demanded" anything? I simply mocked YOUR demand (funny how this ended in me getting criticized for being demanding...) if someone dare even ask who these founders are, they must give her a six figure sum...

I did not in fact demand anything. I said explained a way that people could make whistleblowers more comfortable if they really wanted more information public.

Re: Scammed By A Silicon Valley Startup

#576

Post by albertcbrown »

erikb wrote: post #536
albertcbrown wrote: post #297

This is Charlie. I met the CEO (not sharing his name, though it is in this thread) through his brother in law, Jay. Jay worked with me at a prior company. He was a data scientist and factual. He mentioned his brother in law came to Silicon Valley to do a startup having made some money as an investment banker. As we talked, the CEO stated he is putting in $2M to fund the startup in November. In December, with $400k or…

You made a tough choice between your "partner" and your team. I appreciate the way you chose, and can assure you that not many people choose that way.

Thank you.

Re: Scammed By A Silicon Valley Startup

#577

Post by albertcbrown »

ryuker16 wrote: post #426
albertcbrown wrote: post #297

This is Charlie. I met the CEO (not sharing his name, though it is in this thread) through his brother in law, Jay. Jay worked with me at a prior company. He was a data scientist and factual. He mentioned his brother in law came to Silicon Valley to do a startup having made some money as an investment banker. As we talked, the CEO stated he is putting in $2M to fund the startup in November. In December, with $400k or…

ceo is probaly a con man or an idiot rich guy who inherited his money. Do a background check on him or search his name to see if any crimes come up. Chances are VERY high he kept your $200k. He will be the only one on that burning plane ride with a financial parachute.... I suggest suing him or threatening criminal charges. he might magically find the lost payroll money and reimburse you....poor h-1b visa dudes will…

He didn't keep the money. It all went to payroll.

Re: Scammed By A Silicon Valley Startup

#578

Post by kelukelugames »

xenophon wrote: post #548
kelukelugames wrote: post #465

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A ton of time is an exaggeration. I think this is the first time Redfin is mentioned by name on HN.[1] And I don't think my account is anon if you and Glenn both can figure out who I am. I enjoyed working at Redfin, and I believe they are disrupting real estate in a good way. I would say I love the site. I spend a ton of time advocating for Redfin. But I wish Glenn tried to build a more inclusive work environment. Wh…

Thanks for sharing these experiences, man. I never heard of an incident like the one you describe, but I can totally believe that experiences like these happen by the law of large numbers. To employ a tired but accurate adage, no organization of any meaningful size is immune to this category of concerns, especially not in the tech world. Which of course is no excuse; where my experience remains different than yours i…

You are still being dismissive. In an office of ~200 people, I personally know four women who left for reasons ranging from the hair incident to being told that having a child is a career limiting move. I don't think a 2% departure rate is due to the law of large numbers when the company culture is small enough to be shaped by Glenn.

Anyway, when did you work there? There is a good chance you benefited from a more sensitive management team caused by a few awkward exits.

Re: Scammed By A Silicon Valley Startup

#579

Post by alaskanloops »

ilovesbux831 wrote: post #564
mugenjin9 wrote: post #410

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apparently, the company posted on their facebook that they are taking legal action against OP as: "a disgruntled former employee who has launched a slanderous campaign against WrkRiot and some of its employees via social media". https://www.facebook.com/WrkRiot/

why would a company ever post anything like that on their FB page?

Did you not see what else these guys have said?

Posting on FB is the least of their mistakes at this point..

Although there's still time to f* up even worse!

Re: Scammed By A Silicon Valley Startup

#580

Post by kelukelugames »

xenophon wrote: post #546
kelukelugames wrote: post #512

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's fine, I'm pretty sure I know the guy. I think he's an engineering manager. Managers like him are why so few are willing to speak up. People get defensive real quick. See the video posted below. He knows my facebook account so I don't see how he thinks I'm trying to stay anonymous. Though I'm flattered he read thousands of my tweets to find the four or five about Redfin.

I am not an engineering manager -- and for what it's worth, not a manager at all, just a regular old line employee (or was until a few months ago). As I said, I'm just an ex-Redfinnian who is a minority and experienced an environment that is very different from what you describe, which made me very curious to understand the gap between our experiences -- and if I'm being completely honest, eager to defend a company w…

Okay, so you worked there after me. When I started, devs still checked sex jokes into the code base. Just one of the many things I tried to fix. You are welcome, I guess?
Post reply on HN