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

David Bonderman Resigns from Uber Board

mobile.nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 99 posts

Re: David Bonderman Resigns from Uber Board

#81

Post by pheldagryph »

lefstathiou wrote: post #39
pheldagryph wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> FTFY: He needs to be replaced by a more qualified individual. It doesn't matter what gender they identify as. Given the politics of the situation, reasonable people might hear in this: "A woman should not be hired for this role." Imagine the optics of replacing a sexist old man with another sexist old man. Worth the risk to shareholder value?

"Another sexist old man"? Do you see the irony in your statement?

Yes, I often use irony intentionally. Could you please expand on your comment?

Re: David Bonderman Resigns from Uber Board

#82

Post by pheldagryph »

aaron-lebo wrote: post #38
pheldagryph wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> FTFY: He needs to be replaced by a more qualified individual. It doesn't matter what gender they identify as. Given the politics of the situation, reasonable people might hear in this: "A woman should not be hired for this role." Imagine the optics of replacing a sexist old man with another sexist old man. Worth the risk to shareholder value?

Yeah, optics matter, but a reasonable person might take your comment as saying "optics matter more than merit". Your last sentence doesn't follow. Maybe you could replace a sexist old man with a man who isn't sexist?

I would rejoinder with: the optics are the merit. These are only board members, after all.

Re: David Bonderman Resigns from Uber Board

#83

Post by rubyfan »

heyheyhey wrote: post #18
rubyfan wrote: post #3

I'm not sure I fully understand the point he was trying to make? Was it a dig at Huffington not adding value?

Listening to the audio, he's saying it in jest and Huffington laughs along (albeit nervously since it wasn't a funny joke). It's just reinforcing a stereotype that women tend to talk a lot.

Interesting, thanks for clarifying. Yeah the quotation on its own was unclear what point it was even trying to make.

Re: David Bonderman Resigns from Uber Board

#84

Post by rubyfan »

mikeash wrote: post #50
rubyfan wrote: post #3

I'm not sure I fully understand the point he was trying to make? Was it a dig at Huffington not adding value?

It was a verbal version of these cheeky bathroom doors: http://imgur.com/jkkkFVF Not so cheeky coming from this person at that time and place, though.

Thanks that helps. Seems like one misstep after another with this company but sounds like he did the right thing in resigning.

Re: David Bonderman Resigns from Uber Board

#85

Post by ceejayoz »

zoomzippity wrote: post #58
qq66 wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But in Uber's particular case, the company has a serious problem with women in particular. There haven't been accusations of problems with gay men, or immigrants, or black people. There have been multiple accusations of Uber taking a flippant or dismissive approach to sexual harrassment of women. Imagine Uber had persistent database consistency problems, and a nontechnical member of the board laughed them off, and ha…

After five months of examining the company's culture, Uber's new human resources officer, Liane Hornsey concluded that the firm's treatment of women was no worse than what occurs at other companies. Uber's biggest employee problems are pay and pride, not sexism, says HR boss “Wherever I have worked, I have seen things that are not great for women,” Hornsey said in a USA TODAY interview. “I don’t think it’s about tech…

You really should consider taking a close look at the biases that led you to consider a media interview from the head of Human Resources as the gospel truth.

Her job is to represent and protect the company. HR isn't there to give blunt, honest truth to journalists. They're there to say "everything's fine, no need to sue".

Re: David Bonderman Resigns from Uber Board

#87

Post by lefstathiou »

pheldagryph wrote: post #81
lefstathiou wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Another sexist old man"? Do you see the irony in your statement?

Yes, I often use irony intentionally. Could you please expand on your comment?

Your full quote is: "Imagine the optics of replacing a sexist old man with another sexist old man. Worth the risk to shareholder value?"

Your statement implied that replacing one "sexist old man" (who we believe to be a sexist by something he said) with another "old man" is a risk to shareholder value because that replacement, by virtue of being a man and/or old, will also be a "sexist".

Your statement is passing judgment on a potential candidate without knowing anything about them simply based on their potential gender. That is definitionally sexism, the same sexism you are identifying as a risk to shareholder value. Perhaps you didnt mean it that way but that doesnt change the valid interpretation of the statement. The irony is that this sexist statement was made in a thread about an article of a guy who made a sexist comment (that cost him his job).

Re: David Bonderman Resigns from Uber Board

#88

Post by whitemale »

pgodzin wrote: post #21
initstick wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FTFY: He needs to be replaced by a more qualified individual. It doesn't matter what gender they identify as.

A woman with a perspective on the diversity and culture they need to create seems uniquely qualified for the role.

Are you implying that men are incapable of those sensibilities?

Re: David Bonderman Resigns from Uber Board

#89

Post by whitemale »

pgodzin wrote: post #76
throwaway-1209 wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hiring a woman is not crazy in the least. Hiring a woman because she's a woman over a more qualified male candidate (or the other way around) is harmful. There are plenty of women who don't need such "help".

Not sure why we immediately need to jump to the trope that a more qualified male candidate would be passed over. You're treating a seat on the board as if were some sort of technical role with hard skills. It's not - it's a role to be a positive and influential voice within a company dealing with a toxic culture. Being a successful woman and having all the experiences and perspectives that come with that is literally…

> Not sure why we immediately need to jump to the trope that a more qualified male candidate would be passed over.

This is the original piece comment we are talking about:

> He needs to be replaced by a woman

It's evident that the objective is to hire a women, not to hire a qualified person, therefore a less qualified person can be hired just because she is a women. A person hired like this would most likely not get too much respect because she had an advantage not because of her skill, but her gender.

> Being a successful woman and having all the experiences and perspectives that come with that

See my question in another comment.

Re: David Bonderman Resigns from Uber Board

#90

Post by whitemale »

rayiner wrote: post #51
ohreally123 wrote: post #35

Because white males are a generic, misogynistic, power-hungry/greedy subspecies I guess? Come on.

A man's perspective on these issues is always going to be an academic rather than experiential one. It's like a business school professor versus a startup founder, or a professor of military history versus a veteran. The former have a lot of important things to say and are worth listening to. But if you are, for example, trying to address the issues veterans have reintegrating into civil society, you probably want so…

> A man's perspective on these issues is always going to be an academic rather than experiential one.

So should we make decisions with "feelings" instead of rational logic?

Post reply on HN