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

Thank you, GitHub

github.blog

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 460 posts

Re: Thank you, GitHub

#71

Post by joshmanders »

tgv wrote: post #64
junon wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nat is a mogul in SV. Everyone knows him, many even before GitHub. Simply walking away from GitHub without much of a speech would make it seem like he didn't care or left on bad terms, optics-wise. That would have a potentially serious effect on perception and thus shareholders would be affected. This clearly isn't his intent. I offer a contrary point of view: why does it bother you so much? Simply do not read it.

> shareholders It belongs to Microsoft, doesn't it?

Microsoft has shareholders, don't they?

Re: Thank you, GitHub

#73

Post by VWWHFSfQ »

tgv wrote: post #64
junon wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nat is a mogul in SV. Everyone knows him, many even before GitHub. Simply walking away from GitHub without much of a speech would make it seem like he didn't care or left on bad terms, optics-wise. That would have a potentially serious effect on perception and thus shareholders would be affected. This clearly isn't his intent. I offer a contrary point of view: why does it bother you so much? Simply do not read it.

> shareholders It belongs to Microsoft, doesn't it?

yes. those are the shareholders.

Re: Thank you, GitHub

#74

Post by junon »

Cenk wrote: post #44
orliesaurus wrote: post #30

If person's legacy is a list of all the good things (or bad things) they've done during their time, Nat's legacy as the CEO of GitHub can also be summed into a list. Let me get started...I only remember this one thing but other users of HN can help add more I supposed: - That one time when Nat spoke against DMCA law and said taking down youtube-dl was wrong and he actively pushed for their reinstatement. [1] [1] http…

ICE contract?

IIRC that existed before Nat. I could be wrong.

Re: Thank you, GitHub

#75

Post by hoistbypetard »

dghlsakjg wrote: post #16
virgofx wrote: post #5

The moving on post was kind of vague. I'm curious if there are external factors involved. I do feel like Nat has done a great job at GitHub but curious as to extenuating factors. Would love to hear perspective/sentiment from current hubbers.

The github deal with MS closed almost exactly three years ago. I'm guessing there was a massive financial incentive that he just fulfilled by staying three years. Not a hubber, but this is a pretty common thing to see with acquisitions.

But he was a MS employee pre-acquisition, right? Is it common for the acquiring company to give their employees that manage the acquisition massive incentives that vest in a short-medium window? (Honest question. It's not been common in my experience, but that's pretty limited.)

Re: Thank you, GitHub

#76

Post by thrdbndndn »

azemetre wrote: post #68
Kiro wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Obnoxious comment and perfect example of how toxic this place has become.

Is it really obnoxious? The world is starting to realize that tech companies are causing a lot of societal damage that will take years, if not generations to repair. People are also starting to get upset at large corporations for being tone death and having zero social contracts for the societies they reside in. Public opinion is turning and GitHub/Microsoft are just getting caught in the crosshairs with public senti…

To me, it's obnoxious because this kind of "complaint" is just as formulaic and will appear on every single announcement post thread.

Re: Thank you, GitHub

#77

Post by dsizzle »

dghlsakjg wrote: post #16
virgofx wrote: post #5

The moving on post was kind of vague. I'm curious if there are external factors involved. I do feel like Nat has done a great job at GitHub but curious as to extenuating factors. Would love to hear perspective/sentiment from current hubbers.

The github deal with MS closed almost exactly three years ago. I'm guessing there was a massive financial incentive that he just fulfilled by staying three years. Not a hubber, but this is a pretty common thing to see with acquisitions.

He was already an MS employee 3 years ago though (he came over when Xamarin was acquired in 2016), whereas I usually associate those terms started when you join the parent company. Granted, 2016 is not that much longer ago, and it does seem plausible there was some bonus that vested after 3 years at Github, so you could be right.

Re: Thank you, GitHub

#78

Post by jppope »

Thats a bummer. I was a Nat fan during his tenure. I think he really embraced the spirit of the role. Hopefully the next CEO continues his work

Re: Thank you, GitHub

#79

Post by junon »

88913527 wrote: post #10

Is this a sign of the continued progression of GitHub to be further molded in Microsoft's image? Usually there's a churn in leadership when the alignment isn't there anymore, though it's typically accompanied by graceful public communication.

Embrace, extend, extinguish still alive at MS it seems.

E: Pointing out proven, explicitly-defined-in-internal-emails tactics used by Microsoft always seems to get downvoted on HN. Why? Would someone like to start a conversation?

Re: Thank you, GitHub

#80

Post by _vertigo »

fishtacos wrote: post #48
Kiro wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Obnoxious comment and perfect example of how toxic this place has become.

I actually thought OP's take was very pertinent to the situation. ...which was riddled with phrases like: "With all that we’ve accomplished in mind, and more than five great years at Microsoft under my belt, I’ve decided it’s time for me to go back to my startup roots. What drives me is enabling builders to create the future. Not even Clark Kent could be this braggadocios.

Sorry, what’s bad about that?
Post reply on HN