Live data from Hacker News

Julie Ann Horvath Describes Sexism and Intimidation Behind Her GitHub Exit

techcrunch.com

911–920 of 1001 posts

Re: Julie Ann Horvath Describes Sexism and Intimidation Behind Her GitHub Exit

#911
post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What's inherently wrong with an unwanted advance? I don't want to be hit on at work. It is totally inappropriate and unprofessional. And if I were a minority in my office I would find it very hard to deal with. From the article, he did not say "Want to get a drink some time?" > [He] asked himself over to “talk,” and then professed his love, and “hesitated” when asked to leave.

> I don't want to be hit on at work. But she did get hit on at work and started dating a co-worker (I'm assuming the guy she's dating initiated contact). If that was acceptable by her, then this logic about it being "totally inappropriate and unprofessional" is moot. I do not agree with what the co-worker did in terms of reverting commits and all that, but his initial behavior can be chalked up to all these romantic…

>If that was acceptable by her, then this logic about it being "totally inappropriate and unprofessional" is moot.

It's inappropriate for your other coworkers to hit on you if they know you are in a relationship, regardless of whether that relationship happens to be with a coworker. Where her and her partner actually hit on each other may not have been at work.

Re: Julie Ann Horvath Describes Sexism and Intimidation Behind Her GitHub Exit

#912
post #433

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It really surprises me that somebody can get away with such destructive behaviour as reverting someone else's commits without reasonable cause. What justification is there for not firing on the spot anybody who puts their own personal vendettas over the good of the project?

I once quit a senior dev role as the tech architect at the company had veto power on all code and blocked my work because I'd spelled the word dialog the US way, rather than the UK way (dialogue). This was not in a public interface, this was in variable names. Ignoring that every word in programming is in US English: color, gray, program. We were deadlocked for weeks, with him refusing to ship working code that fulfi…

Since these were variable names they didn't have to be real words. So you should have explained that your "dialog" was not the American spelling of "dialogue", but a nonsense non-word that you made up (that happened to be spelled the same way as the American version of "dialogue").

Re: Julie Ann Horvath Describes Sexism and Intimidation Behind Her GitHub Exit

#913
post #882

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't pretend to have any info on what truly happened. But the story doesn't have to be 'completely accurate' for it to be disturbing. A company can't have family members browse around company offices and imposing themselves on employees with whom they have no professional or personal relationship. I find it very hard to understand how the wife's repeated presence can be favorably interpreted if it did indeed upset…

it could have been well intentioned. bringing in an pseudo-outsider may not be the smartest move but its also not necessarily evil at all. the founder may have felt that his wife could relate in some way. until more evidence is given, we should withhold judgement.

Things like this should be formalised though. Its very unusual for a spouse to prance around any organisation handing out directives/advice. Maybe its a sign that the founder in question doesn't have the people skills to handle her possibly dominant personality.

Re: Julie Ann Horvath Describes Sexism and Intimidation Behind Her GitHub Exit

#914
post #13

1. What part of the article above would be considered hearsay? Aside from the screenshots, it feels the least bit gossipy. 2. Right to confront accusers? This seems extremely one-sided. No one she blames gets to defend themselves, where are the witnesses on either side?

> We are awaiting comment from GitHub regarding these allegations, and GitHub says it is looking into it.

> We are waiting for comment from GitHub about these allegations.

> GitHub says it is investigating the matter: “We’re looking into this.”

This post might be entirely true, but for now it is an expanded personal blog post posing as news. I will hold judgement on both parties until there is evidence, but I doubt most readers skimming headlines will.

It is unfortunate this was posted before TechCrunch or any other "news" site got corroboration from other parties or evidence of any of it. The post offers no evidence outside what was created by Ms. Horvath herself.

Re: Julie Ann Horvath Describes Sexism and Intimidation Behind Her GitHub Exit

#915
post #901

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I mean, someone reverting your code because of a personal vendetta? I laughed out loud when I read this and several other specific details in the story. It sounded very familiar. I have several friends and many acquaintances who work at Valve. One very senior engineer initially worked on Source 2 about three years ago but had to quickly switch projects because another, more tenured engineer was expressing his disag…

"I'm waiting for a hip rebranding of the term 'management'..." Easy, just start calling managers "people hackers" and launch a people hacking tips blog next week.

I used to think managers were worthless ... And then I had a bad one, and figured out the hard way how much bullshit a good manager insulates his developers from.

Re: Julie Ann Horvath Describes Sexism and Intimidation Behind Her GitHub Exit

#916
post #893
post #882

Earlier quoted context omitted.

it could have been well intentioned. bringing in an pseudo-outsider may not be the smartest move but its also not necessarily evil at all. the founder may have felt that his wife could relate in some way. until more evidence is given, we should withhold judgement.

In what scenario is having an undocumented employee ok?

In these types of situations, it's usually pretty difficult to come to solid conclusions about the chain of events this early. My initial take?

It's not uncommon for business owners to rely heavily on non-employees for advice, even in the day-to-day operations. Spouses are especially common. What confuses me is that the wife, as portrayed, seems a bit irrational--if not delusional. There's a big difference between even vocal trusted advisors, and the sort of power the wife described herself as having.

So much so that I think there's a third possible interpretation: the quotes are accurate, given by a wife that genuinely believes her statements even though they have no basis in reality. This sort of delusion, in varying degrees, is quite common across the population. We convince ourselves of something--in this case, the wife that she has power in the Github organization--and then attempt to reduce the cognitive dissonance that arrises from the belief and the evidence to the contrary. As time goes on, we try harder and harder to justify those irrational beliefs.

It's entirely possible that there's no truth whatsoever to the wife's words, but that the wife genuinely believed them in spite of it. And that Julie Horvath is entirely accurate in detailing the conversation and the implied hostility she felt from the founder and his wife. So now, not only do you have to determine whether the conversation took place, but also whether the power the wife alleged existed in the first place. Unfortunately for Github, even if the wife never had that power, the wife was still able to contribute to a hostile work environment and that can have significant legal ramifications even though she wasn't an employee.

Friends you go out for drinks with to talk about life and work slowly transform into "spies" who keep you informed of what's happening in the office under the guise of gossip. Curiously taking a peek at an open chat tab on the husband's laptop becomes "access." Commenting on whether you liked a potential hire you met earlier becomes "responsibility over hires." Love for your husband and concern for his work becomes an overprotective desire to shield him from harm.

Given how rapidly Github has grown, the idea that any trusted non-employee, wife or not, would have that sort of power and influence described seems absurd. Hell, for a while it seemed as though they announced a new hire daily. Far too many for one non-employee, no matter how often she went into the office, to have that sort of power. Especially when most were technical positions.

Time will tell, but for now, more information is needed. Anyhow, I suppose I took issue with the phrase "undocumented employee" and ran off on a tangent :). The wife needn't have been an employee at all to have helped cause a shitstorm.

Re: Julie Ann Horvath Describes Sexism and Intimidation Behind Her GitHub Exit

#917

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nor in Australia, is HR your friend. I had a very similar situation to this, as a male, in a software development environment. Even down to the bullying and the silently deleted files and commits. The thing I learnt about HR is they are not professionals. They do not exist to perform the professional duties associated with Human Resources. They may tell you and themselves that, but they are the formalised face (at an…

I would say the only thing to do, if you are in a situation to do it, is legal action. It's the only thing people like that understand. Power and money. So take their money if you can. And find a better place to contribute your skills. There are better places to work out there. Unfortunately, at least in the US, most employers will not hire someone who sued an ex-employer, even when the suit was clearly justified. It…

Both with regard to stuff like this and whistle-blowers more generally, I kind of wonder why more companies don't hire former whistle-blowers as a signal they've nothing to blow whistles about.

Re: Julie Ann Horvath Describes Sexism and Intimidation Behind Her GitHub Exit

#918

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If her problem with it was that some random other guy openly finding some random other girl attractive in her workplace "makes her feel unsafe", then that would be highly hypocritical, as she admits she was dating a coworker and that other coworkers knew this, which can only encourage others to think it's OK to make romantic advances to coworkers. I mean, you can't have it both ways. If you think men and women should…

By the way they kept saying partner I was under the impression she was dating a woman. In which case she could theoretically hate males looking at women and still date a woman on the team.

Okay, I am - for better or worse - not always known for my progressive views. But really, you're pulling the 'man-hating dyke' card here?

Re: Julie Ann Horvath Describes Sexism and Intimidation Behind Her GitHub Exit

#919
post #553

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Does that entire paragraph not just objectify the wife and establish differences between the sexes based on anecdotal experience? Re objectification: couples get advice from their life partners. That doesn't mean this is their life partners only goal. Re: 'establish differences between the sexes based on anecdotal experience' is there anything ethically wrong with this? Would you prefer a citation be added, eg, 'ne…

> Re objectification: couples get advice from their life partners. That doesn't mean this is their life partners only goal. Women objectification is about treating a woman like an object, a belonging, a resource. As it turns out, the person writing the parent comment defined a founder's wife as "one of your most valuable business resources ". That person should have said, "some of your most valuable business insights…

Let's put the shoe on the other foot:

> The person writing the parent comment defined a founder's husband as "one of your most valuable business resources".

Nope, not offended. The husband is valuable, in no way does it state this is the only value of the husband.

Re: Julie Ann Horvath Describes Sexism and Intimidation Behind Her GitHub Exit

#920

There seems to be several problems. Not entirely sexism. 1. Founder's wife asked Horvath out and gave her a lecture about who is the boss. Probably out of jealousy. 2. Founder's wife physically inanimate Horvath, making her unwelcome and scared. 3. Founder did not stop the wife and protect his wife. 4. Horvath was approached by a male co-worker and according to her her rejection had caused tension between her and tha…

>Regarding the strip-club comment, I don't know the best way to avoid it. I, as a male, try to avoid staring at another female because I fear someone like Horvath accuses me of sexism. Maybe the guy was just bored or thought that female worker was beautiful. Staring at someone shouldn't be counted as sexism. It's hard. Would a female staring at a beautiful male count as sexism?

The problem isn't sexism so much as objectification. It's just shitty to treat someone like meat. It's not going to help people feel like part of a team if they're gawked at. If it's men gawking at women, it's going to alienate the women. Like, seriously, can't people just control themselves and treat other people as people and not sexual objects?

As for the sexism part… historically, you know, men are allowed to stare at women and women aren't really allowed to (their traditional role is to be coy, y'know?). It's an action that is typically masculine, and it's an action that reminds women that they're different. That they don't quite belong. Etc. etc. It's just not positive, it's not helpful, it's just base instinct—and one that should probably be overpowered in the workplace.

It's one of those things that is going to be painfully obvious to someone who has experienced discrimination (eg. sexism, racism, homophobia, whatever) in their life, and not a big deal to those that haven't.

Post reply on HN