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

Antisocial Coding: My Year at GitHub

where.coraline.codes

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 572 posts

Re: Antisocial Coding: My Year at GitHub

#61

Post by ivraatiems »

thsowers wrote: post #38
ivraatiems wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Just think it's worth mentioning that she doesn't seem to present evidence that the data scientist was "transphobic". She doesn't say they were. She says the question as phrased was. That's a big difference.

You are correct, thank you for pointing that out. However, she is still assuming that the question was phrased in a "Transphobic" way. Perhaps she reads it like that, but I doubt that was the authors (or questions) intention. Perhaps i'm wrong

I think it's not an assumption so much as an observation based on her definition of transphobia. This is the point I'm trying to get at throughout this thread: Github says she was fired for the way she conveyed her beliefs, and not what they were. I disagree. Those who do agree seem to be mainly those who disagree with her beliefs. I'm trying to understand that disconnect.

Re: Antisocial Coding: My Year at GitHub

#62

Post by jwr »

Dirlewanger wrote: post #14
problems wrote: post #12

Isn't this the person who ran a code of conduct that has a website which includes things like "thoughtless use of pronouns" and mentions meritocracy as an evil, not a goal to strive for? Can't really say I'm expecting someone like that to be low friction.

She went on a tirade against an Opal contributor a couple years back: https://github.com/opal/opal/issues/941

A "tirade"? I read her statements in that thread. I'd say they were very measured.

Re: Antisocial Coding: My Year at GitHub

#63

Post by chollida1 »

steveklabnik wrote: post #11
sethrin wrote: post #6

Am I reading this correctly? Fired for lack of empathetic communication? Is that really a thing?

This is not the only story I've heard about this kind of thing, at various places of employment. At-will means "for basically any reason." PIPs are used to try and demonstrate cause so that collecting benefits is harder. It's not always in these words, sometimes it's presented as "culture fit", which is a bit broader but "communication style" fits under it.

> PIPs are used to try and demonstrate cause so that collecting benefits is harder.

I mean, I'd agree that someone at some point in time has used a PIP for this reason, but I'd strongly argue that this is wrong.

I'd argue a much more charitable and accurate description of why PIP's are used is to protect the company from a litigious former employee. They are designed to show that they company tried to help the fired employee before they took the final action of letting them go.

Re: Antisocial Coding: My Year at GitHub

#65

Post by microcolonel »

opportune wrote: post #49

The main thing I've taken away from the whole github situation is that, as a tech company, you should just entirely stay away from public involvement in the social justice sphere. That doesn't mean exclusively hiring white men and sending out Kalanick-style emails; it means keeping your work environment as professional and politically neutral as possible unless absolutely necessary. My employer does a good job of thi…

I agree wholeheartedly. As soon as political and emotional appeals overrule standards of professional conduct, everyone is walking on eggshells.

> assume mistakes are honest and be polite in correcting them.

Especially big on this. Nobody can read minds, so when people make mistakes, there is no winning tactic other than to assume good intent.

Re: Antisocial Coding: My Year at GitHub

#66

Post by roywiggins »

Dirlewanger wrote: post #13

While GitHub seemingly handled her employment poorly, this person sounds horrible to work with: >Was politely calling out a data scientist on a problematic and transphobic survey answer a demonstration of lack of empathy? How presumptuous. Ever thought that maybe the person putting it together didn't know any better? What does framing oneself as the victim accomplish here? In addition, this is hilariously ironic give…

> I was very disappointed at this 101 mistake, and sadly opened an issue referencing the question. The body of my issue read:

> "'Transgender' is not a gender. Transgender people may be male, female, gender queer, non-binary... If you want to know if a survey respondent is transgender, you need to explicitly ask that question."

She was disappointed. She explained her problem with the survey in a non-judgmental way- "This question is based on a false premise, the correct way to ask this question is X". I don't see how she could have handled this particular interaction any better.

Re: Antisocial Coding: My Year at GitHub

#67

Post by rndmwlk »

ivraatiems wrote: post #10
sethrin wrote: post #6

Am I reading this correctly? Fired for lack of empathetic communication? Is that really a thing?

What's most interesting is that "empathetic communication" is generally not prioritized in software development environments, in favor of exactly the kind of polite-but-direct communication the author employs. (In fact, many feel that even politeness is unnecessary or harmful. For instance, Linus Torvalds' and other OSS developers are known and regularly praised for their bluntness.) I've spoken out often on HN about…

>I think it is possible that there is some sexism here in that I'm not confident a male employee at Github would ever be challenged over failing this communication standard.

What leads you to this conclusion?

Sexism may have been at play, or she may have been rude to the wrong person (or perceived as rude). I don't think it is appropriate to draw broad conclusions with only one side of a story and zero evidence.

> Also, I have never, ever heard of a PIP being used as anything other than a strategy for building a case for firing someone.

Agreed on this point, as soon as she had a phone call with manager + HR they had already decided to fire her.

Re: Antisocial Coding: My Year at GitHub

#68

Post by s73ver »

thsowers wrote: post #38
ivraatiems wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Just think it's worth mentioning that she doesn't seem to present evidence that the data scientist was "transphobic". She doesn't say they were. She says the question as phrased was. That's a big difference.

You are correct, thank you for pointing that out. However, she is still assuming that the question was phrased in a "Transphobic" way. Perhaps she reads it like that, but I doubt that was the authors (or questions) intention. Perhaps i'm wrong

I don’t think anyone, including the author, thought that the intention of the question was to be transphobic. That doesn’t mean it’s not a transphobic question, though. Especially when the point of the survey was to gauge engagement in Open Source by marginalized people, having such a mistake can be seen as pretty tone deaf, and imply that the company really doesn’t care.

Re: Antisocial Coding: My Year at GitHub

#69

Post by georgespencer »

Dirlewanger wrote: post #14
problems wrote: post #12

Isn't this the person who ran a code of conduct that has a website which includes things like "thoughtless use of pronouns" and mentions meritocracy as an evil, not a goal to strive for? Can't really say I'm expecting someone like that to be low friction.

She went on a tirade against an Opal contributor a couple years back: https://github.com/opal/opal/issues/941

Hmm. That entire thread is full of people communicating in a fairly brusque manner -- OP's comments didn't seem like a 'tirade' to me! But I guess it's up to the receiver to decide what a tirade is.

Re: Antisocial Coding: My Year at GitHub

#70

Post by throw201707 »

This is not a comment on the experiences described in the article, but it makes me extremely sad that the word "meritocratic/meritocracy" is used pejoratively, almost as if it were damning in itself. To me, meritocracy is something to be cherished, being far preferable to the systems that came before it, and being inherently anti-discriminatory.

(Yes, people's hardships which prevent them achieving their full potential should be taken into account, when determining "merit"; anything causing these hardships, including (especially?) past discrimination, should be countered; and people who had been subjected to the hardship should be treated with care and compassion, but that's orthogonal to meritocracy itself.

Also, obviously, your skills and abilities (in the context of work and meritocracy) have no bearing on your intrinsic value as a human being (so we need something like guaranteed basic income or progressive taxes to reduce issues like pay inequality).)

Post reply on HN