61–70 of 187 posts
I think the thing that frustrates me the most about it is: they’ll probably get a thousand applicants. A bunch of 25 year-old kids with a ton of talent and stars in their eyes are going to try to get this crap job for crap pay so they can work somewhere “cool” and feel like a part of something big. The Penny Arcade “machine” (their term) will roll on, making its millions of dollars while somehow retaining the “little…
I think the thing that frustrates me the most about it is: they’ll probably get a thousand applicants. A bunch of 25 year-old kids with a ton of talent and stars in their eyes are going to try to get this crap job for crap pay so they can work somewhere “cool” and feel like a part of something big. The Penny Arcade “machine” (their term) will roll on, making its millions of dollars while somehow retaining the “little…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
At no point does he structure his argument thus: {Khoo, Penny Arcade, anyone} is {immoral, stupid, lacking in some way} therefore they are wrong. Absent that, there is no ad hominem . What you have is a discussion of the personalities involved in the enterprise and a speculation as to their motives, methods and the means available to them. All of that is relevant in answering some questions which need to be asked of…
It's gotten to the point where any time I see someone citing a logical fallacy on the Internet, I can be 99% assured that they don't actually understand it.
I have the opposite reaction to this posting: Penny Arcade are being abundantly clear and transparent about the requirements and drawbacks of the role. It's not exploitation; it's a trade, and Penny Arcade have listed out their terms. Everyone is free, or not, to go along with what they want. The author mixes two messages: (1) the merits of the offer, and (2) the ethics of the offer. The author may be right about (1)…
> I have the opposite reaction to this posting: Penny Arcade are being abundantly clear and transparent about the requirements and drawbacks of the role. Given what the requirements and the drawbacks are, that's just marginally better than not being clear. To give an extreme example to make this clear, I'm not going to be lauded by putting up an ad like: "I'm a old-style racist, and want a black person to serve as my…
In terms of greed, the blog post above correctly points out that Penny Arcade is at this point a large outfit that is making a ton of money. The founders are at this point millionaires and will, baring extravagant spending, never have to worry about money again. So when they come out with a job posting such as this one people look at it as they would seeing a wealthy investor hiring an unpaid intern as an assistant, or something similar. This person has more than enough money to satisfy almost every desire, and yet rather than pay competitive wages, or work to spread some of that wealth out to the people who help them obtain their success they have deliberately chosen to keep as much of it as possible even to the point of paying people far less than they are worth, instead talking up nebulous terms like "access", "experience", or "work environment". This strikes most people as the definition of greed (taking more than you could possibly need even if it means exploiting other people) and we generally react negatively.
In terms of hypocrisy, there is right up front the spectacle of a businessman and salesperson telling you with a straight face that they are "not money-oriented" despite the fact that this is a complete description of their job. But more than that, you have an organization that has spent years taking potshots at the "big guys" ostensibly standing up for the "gamer", aka the little guy, the consumer, etc, etc. Hell they even run a comic about QA work in the game industry, ostensibly a satire about the terrible conditions, accompanied by writeups from people doing QA talking about the terrible exploitation they have faced. But apparently, when push comes to shove (or paying market wages), Penny Arcade is just as comfortable taking advantage of naive young people, willing to grind themselves down for their "heroes" as their heroes gaze on and pocket millions.
Given those two things, I think the only surprising thing is that apparently the powers that be at Penny Arcade are too sheltered to not immediately understand that this would be the reaction they would receive.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> This confuses me, because its as if the author tries to force his valuation of the opportunity onto all prospective applicants. Perhaps it's rather as the author believes in an objective reality, where there is one true valuation of a thing, and he's not so much trying to "force his valuation onto all prospective applicants" as trying to "communicate the real valuation to all prospective applicants". > He recognize…
Perhaps it's rather as the author believes in an objective reality, where there is one true valuation of a thing, and he's not so much trying to "force his valuation onto all prospective applicants" as trying to "communicate the real valuation to all prospective applications". I strongly disagree with this, though. I'm young, but I'm confident people can have different experiences at the same position -- I have frien…
Actually, looking at the job post for PA:
- 'Code in multiple front-end and back-end languages' - well, I can do that. In fact, I do a lot of backend work at my job, and am forced to do front-end work for it as well because we don't have web devs on staff.
- "Maintain servers and other hardware including load balancing and database admin" - Yep, I do that. It's part of my core tasks.
- "Do general office IT" - Don't need to do much of this, because we're almost entirely a Mac shop.
- "Manage your own projects" - I suck at this, but It's part of the job.
- "Be on call 27/7 though we hope not to bug you too much in the middle of the night" - Yep. I once got a phone call at 3 AM and had to get up and refactor some code because it wasn't displaying data properly. Not even business critical, that's just how it goes.
I could make more elsewhere, and have on several occasions. I could make twice as much consulting, for example. The perks, however, are great. I get to set my own hours outside of our core hours, I work with really smart people, we have neat company events, and all in all it's a great place to work.
So for everyone who thinks that I'm being 'exploited' the way these PA guys are: I really, really like my job. I have a great team and a great boss, and I'm happier here than I've been in my entire working career, but if someone broke it down to just these bullet points, it might sound shitty.
Personally, I think it would be a great opportunity to work at Penny Arcade. They're a huge company in some ways, and they have a lot of visibility. It's also a fun office environment (ping-pong tournaments? prank wars? video games?) if you're the right fit. I'd apply if I were willing to move to the US (and if I were, Seattle would be a good pick).
It's not all about money. If you're getting paid enough to live comfortably at home, the next most important thing is to live comfortably at work.
I have the opposite reaction to this posting: Penny Arcade are being abundantly clear and transparent about the requirements and drawbacks of the role. It's not exploitation; it's a trade, and Penny Arcade have listed out their terms. Everyone is free, or not, to go along with what they want. The author mixes two messages: (1) the merits of the offer, and (2) the ethics of the offer. The author may be right about (1)…
Are you redefining ethics to suit your argument? Consent does not voids ethics. It's only a single component of ethical behavior.
I think the thing that frustrates me the most about it is: they’ll probably get a thousand applicants. A bunch of 25 year-old kids with a ton of talent and stars in their eyes are going to try to get this crap job for crap pay so they can work somewhere “cool” and feel like a part of something big. The Penny Arcade “machine” (their term) will roll on, making its millions of dollars while somehow retaining the “little…
However hard it may be for some here to believe, there are many people who are most efficient -- and most satisfied -- in an environment of constant and unpredictable variety in both type and intensity of work, just as there are people who find it more entertaining being jacks of all trades rather than mastering one.
Implying that all jobs should accommodate your personal preferences (e.g. specialization, predictability, or work-life balance) is not doing them any service, and their skills are already discounted too far in this marketplace.