Diversity and Feedback at GitHub(github.com)
github.com
Diversity and Feedback at GitHub
https://github.com/blog/1843-diversity-and-feedback-at-github
56 comments
There is an interesting race/gender intersectional aspect of the "not enough women in the pipeline" problem that gets thrown around on HN so often. They're discounting thousands of Indian and Asian women who are entering the industry every year, especially at the graduate level. Where do they end up working? Mostly in big cos. Why? You guessed it - startup "culture". As an anecdote, a few weeks ago, a very good Indian friend of mine started work at a hot SF startup (their backend is in Go!). In her second week, she was asked not to heat up her food in the microwave because her food 'smelled'. If that wasn't enough, her teammates pressured her to drink a Vodka shot after a major deploy (which is apparently, customary). Never mind she's never tasted alcohol in her life. She quit in her 3rd week. This is not a single anecdote. As an Indian person currently working at a startup, I can tell you first hand that the big cos I've worked at are far more culturally sensitive and accomodating to POC.
> As an anecdote, a few weeks ago, a very good Indian friend of mine started work at a hot SF startup (their backend is in Go!). In her second week, she was asked not to heat up her food in the microwave because her food 'smelled'.
That's a hard one. I personally don't see that as a cultural issue. Startups are usually within small quarters. Big Co's typically have isolated "kitchen areas". I think it's important when working in small quarters organizations to be respectful of the workplace and sensibilities of your coworkers. It's somewhat analogous to BO when someone refuses to wear deodorant or the likes because of their convictions. Unlike noise that can be drowned out with headphones, you can't really drown out smells.
That's a hard one. I personally don't see that as a cultural issue. Startups are usually within small quarters. Big Co's typically have isolated "kitchen areas". I think it's important when working in small quarters organizations to be respectful of the workplace and sensibilities of your coworkers. It's somewhat analogous to BO when someone refuses to wear deodorant or the likes because of their convictions. Unlike noise that can be drowned out with headphones, you can't really drown out smells.
Indian food isn't BO. It's a different kind of food. For me, personally, I didn't like the smell of bacon at first. But guess what? I sucked it up and got used to it. That's what cultural sensitivity is. If you can't stand the smell of Indian food, then at least be honest about it and don't hire Indian people as a policy. Why this pretense about diversity?
>Indian food isn't BO.
Didn't say it was. I was speaking on sensibilities.
> I sucked it up and got used to it. That's what cultural sensitivity is.
Cultural sensitivity is not telling people to "suck it up." That's how you create problems. We're speaking about the workplace, a professional environment that should be culturally neutral as possible so that cultural particulars do not affect the working conditions of others.
Didn't say it was. I was speaking on sensibilities.
> I sucked it up and got used to it. That's what cultural sensitivity is.
Cultural sensitivity is not telling people to "suck it up." That's how you create problems. We're speaking about the workplace, a professional environment that should be culturally neutral as possible so that cultural particulars do not affect the working conditions of others.
as culturally neutral as possible, and welcoming of those who are a culture fit?
So what's their microwave for if you can't heat up food?
Heating up food that doesn't cause odors that enough others in the office apparently dislike, obviously.
How do you know beforehand what smells others dislike?
What happens when the cumulative dislikes of food smells makes it impossible to bring in most meals?
My partner is a vegetarian and doesn't like the smell of meat. Would you stop eating all your meat dishes in the office?
What happens when someone who was "banned" from eating or heating their food in the office fights back by suddenly banning other foods?
What happens when the cumulative dislikes of food smells makes it impossible to bring in most meals?
My partner is a vegetarian and doesn't like the smell of meat. Would you stop eating all your meat dishes in the office?
What happens when someone who was "banned" from eating or heating their food in the office fights back by suddenly banning other foods?
So if I don't like bacon and ask you to stop bringing it to lunch, will you do it? Why, because this is "your" country? My friend is actually a US citizen. If the majority of my coworkers are devout Christians, and they ask me to take off my desktop wallpaper because it contains elements of Hindu symbolism, is that permissible?
Take solace, big corp won't let you change your wallpaper away from the approved one with the company logo, precisely so that no one is ever offended. That is the tradeoff.
Maybe the same thing that makes big corp so safe is also what makes it so boring that your friend wants to work in a startup instead.
Maybe startups have so much potential because you're opinionated but otherwise rule-free, so the tradeoff there is that not everybody is compatible with the company culture.
Maybe I'm a white Mormon, and there are millions of us in the USA (more of us than there are Indians, btw) who don't drink either despite the pervasive American drinking culture, and get pressured to drink. all. the. time. But get along better with an office of mostly Indian Muslims because none of us drink or send porno pictures to each other over email, entirely by choice rather than by regulation. And we can do it all in a tiny company with few rules because we have a company culture.
Maybe startup culture needs more Indian (or Mormon...) founders.
Maybe the same thing that makes big corp so safe is also what makes it so boring that your friend wants to work in a startup instead.
Maybe startups have so much potential because you're opinionated but otherwise rule-free, so the tradeoff there is that not everybody is compatible with the company culture.
Maybe I'm a white Mormon, and there are millions of us in the USA (more of us than there are Indians, btw) who don't drink either despite the pervasive American drinking culture, and get pressured to drink. all. the. time. But get along better with an office of mostly Indian Muslims because none of us drink or send porno pictures to each other over email, entirely by choice rather than by regulation. And we can do it all in a tiny company with few rules because we have a company culture.
Maybe startup culture needs more Indian (or Mormon...) founders.
I find your attitude confusing.
Yes, America has its own culture. Yes, it's often different in many ways from what's typically found in India. But none of this is a secret.
Anyone who travels, whether for a short term or for much longer, to a country with distinctly different culture and customs should be prepared to adapt somewhat. Or at the very least, they should not be offended when the culture conflicts with what they're accustomed to.
I don't think it's unreasonable to request that one staff member not cook food that others in the office may find to smell bad. Such a request isn't about race or gender or anything like that, obviously. I don't doubt that the same request would be made to an American who chose to cook the same food.
The same goes for celebratory alcohol consumption after big events. It's just part of American culture in general. It happens when celebrating accomplishments of all sorts.
It's one thing to avoid overt, unjustified discrimination. But I don't think that American companies should have to bend over backward to accommodate people who don't want to accept, or at least tolerate, the basic aspects of American culture, either.
I say this as somebody who isn't even an American, by the way. This should hold true regardless of the company, where it's located, and where the foreign employees are from.
If you want to work in a foreign country, you should be willing to adapt to their established cultural norms. If you don't like American culture and customs, for whatever reason, maybe you shouldn't live there.
Yes, America has its own culture. Yes, it's often different in many ways from what's typically found in India. But none of this is a secret.
Anyone who travels, whether for a short term or for much longer, to a country with distinctly different culture and customs should be prepared to adapt somewhat. Or at the very least, they should not be offended when the culture conflicts with what they're accustomed to.
I don't think it's unreasonable to request that one staff member not cook food that others in the office may find to smell bad. Such a request isn't about race or gender or anything like that, obviously. I don't doubt that the same request would be made to an American who chose to cook the same food.
The same goes for celebratory alcohol consumption after big events. It's just part of American culture in general. It happens when celebrating accomplishments of all sorts.
It's one thing to avoid overt, unjustified discrimination. But I don't think that American companies should have to bend over backward to accommodate people who don't want to accept, or at least tolerate, the basic aspects of American culture, either.
I say this as somebody who isn't even an American, by the way. This should hold true regardless of the company, where it's located, and where the foreign employees are from.
If you want to work in a foreign country, you should be willing to adapt to their established cultural norms. If you don't like American culture and customs, for whatever reason, maybe you shouldn't live there.
"bend over backward to accommodate people who don't want to accept, or at least tolerate, the basic aspects of American culture"
Drinking shots at work is not a 'basic aspect' of American culture.
Drinking shots at work is not a 'basic aspect' of American culture.
No, it's not something that happens every day. But celebratory drinking after a significant event is a very common American custom.
Based on what the earlier commenter wrote ("her teammates pressured her to drink a Vodka shot after a major deploy"), it apparently happened after a major software deployment. For small startups with close-knit teams who've just put in a lot of effort, this can be a big event, and cause for such celebration.
This may not have even happened at the work place, mind you. The original comment isn't totally clear, but it's not at all unusual for an American software development team to go out for a few drinks at a nearby bar, especially after completing some important work.
To most of the Americans there, it was probably a very insignificant thing. I don't see how they should be at fault for encouraging somebody else to engage in a pretty typical, and generally harmless, American social activity.
Based on what the earlier commenter wrote ("her teammates pressured her to drink a Vodka shot after a major deploy"), it apparently happened after a major software deployment. For small startups with close-knit teams who've just put in a lot of effort, this can be a big event, and cause for such celebration.
This may not have even happened at the work place, mind you. The original comment isn't totally clear, but it's not at all unusual for an American software development team to go out for a few drinks at a nearby bar, especially after completing some important work.
To most of the Americans there, it was probably a very insignificant thing. I don't see how they should be at fault for encouraging somebody else to engage in a pretty typical, and generally harmless, American social activity.
It is not the role of work colleagues to "teach" people how to be American.
They should be tolerant, inclusive and understanding of people's differences. What you're proposing is the complete opposite and quite frankly it's people like you that are the problem in our industry.
They should be tolerant, inclusive and understanding of people's differences. What you're proposing is the complete opposite and quite frankly it's people like you that are the problem in our industry.
> The same goes for celebratory alcohol consumption after big events. It's just part of American culture in general. It happens when celebrating accomplishments of all sorts.
But do you think it's fair to force somebody to partake it this kind of thing? If somebody's a teetotaller, why shouldn't they be allowed to opt out of this kind of thing?
But do you think it's fair to force somebody to partake it this kind of thing? If somebody's a teetotaller, why shouldn't they be allowed to opt out of this kind of thing?
What makes you think they "forced" it on her?
The earlier commenter wrote that "her teammates pressured her".
While I don't know the particulars of this situation, it sure doesn't sound like they physically restrained her, forced open her mouth and poured alcohol down her throat, or anything that extreme.
It was probably just verbal encouragement to try something she apparently hadn't done before, delivered in a friendly, although perhaps overt, manner. This is pretty common within American culture, when facing somebody who hasn't indulged in something that most Americans have. They'll encourage you to try it, and if you resist, they'll still encourage you to try it.
Yes, somebody who isn't used to this aspect of American culture may consider it to be a form of "pressure". But the intent is probably good-natured, and it's more about helping somebody try new experiences rather than control.
Most of the Americans I've dealt with, especially in a work setting, would not truly force the consumption of alcohol on somebody else, of course. Explaining to them that you don't drink, for whatever reason, will very likely put the matter to rest quickly. They may still playfully poke fun at you because of it, but that's just part of American culture.
The earlier commenter wrote that "her teammates pressured her".
While I don't know the particulars of this situation, it sure doesn't sound like they physically restrained her, forced open her mouth and poured alcohol down her throat, or anything that extreme.
It was probably just verbal encouragement to try something she apparently hadn't done before, delivered in a friendly, although perhaps overt, manner. This is pretty common within American culture, when facing somebody who hasn't indulged in something that most Americans have. They'll encourage you to try it, and if you resist, they'll still encourage you to try it.
Yes, somebody who isn't used to this aspect of American culture may consider it to be a form of "pressure". But the intent is probably good-natured, and it's more about helping somebody try new experiences rather than control.
Most of the Americans I've dealt with, especially in a work setting, would not truly force the consumption of alcohol on somebody else, of course. Explaining to them that you don't drink, for whatever reason, will very likely put the matter to rest quickly. They may still playfully poke fun at you because of it, but that's just part of American culture.
> They may still playfully poke fun at you because of it, but that's just part of American culture.
That isn't professional. As far as you know the person has had alcohol issues in her family and doesn't want to carry it into her work persona. Or she may believe in a religion that forbids it and doesn't want to be known for her religious views at work.
Drinking a shot when you deploy or explaining why you won't should not be a requirement for a job as a software engineer.
That isn't professional. As far as you know the person has had alcohol issues in her family and doesn't want to carry it into her work persona. Or she may believe in a religion that forbids it and doesn't want to be known for her religious views at work.
Drinking a shot when you deploy or explaining why you won't should not be a requirement for a job as a software engineer.
I very much doubt it was a "requirement" in any sense. My guess is that the co-worker from India totally misconstrued the situation, due to not having a good understanding of American culture.
I could easily see the dialog being quite friendly, and going something like:
American: "Hey, that was one hell of a deployment, but it's done now. Let's have a round of drinks, to celebrate!"
Indian: "No, I don't want to."
American: "Awww, why not?"
Indian: "I've never had alcohol before. I don't want to."
American: "Come on, try it, it's fun! We do this after every big deployment."
Indian: "No, thanks."
American: "Okay."
The American thought he was being friendly and inclusive, by encouraging the Indian to participate in a pretty common American celebratory custom. The American was somewhat more assertive than the Indian was expecting, like many friendly and outgoing Americans can be. The Indian misinterpreted this as "pressure". She tells her Indian friend. He lacks a good understanding of American culture, too, and misinterprets the American's behavior. He posts here, and we have this discussion.
I could easily see the dialog being quite friendly, and going something like:
American: "Hey, that was one hell of a deployment, but it's done now. Let's have a round of drinks, to celebrate!"
Indian: "No, I don't want to."
American: "Awww, why not?"
Indian: "I've never had alcohol before. I don't want to."
American: "Come on, try it, it's fun! We do this after every big deployment."
Indian: "No, thanks."
American: "Okay."
The American thought he was being friendly and inclusive, by encouraging the Indian to participate in a pretty common American celebratory custom. The American was somewhat more assertive than the Indian was expecting, like many friendly and outgoing Americans can be. The Indian misinterpreted this as "pressure". She tells her Indian friend. He lacks a good understanding of American culture, too, and misinterprets the American's behavior. He posts here, and we have this discussion.
Everything you've described is part of the problem. For some of it there's a better word: bullying.
That's nonsense.
Bullying is done out of malice. Encouraging somebody to enjoy a celebratory shot of alcohol after a big event is, in America, a show of friendship and camaraderie.
Yes, Americans can often be assertive, especially in a playful or friendly manner. That's part of American culture. As a foreigner, it's best to understand this.
Bullying is done out of malice. Encouraging somebody to enjoy a celebratory shot of alcohol after a big event is, in America, a show of friendship and camaraderie.
Yes, Americans can often be assertive, especially in a playful or friendly manner. That's part of American culture. As a foreigner, it's best to understand this.
Sometimes ignorance is just as bad as malice.
I also note that your argument could be applied almost verbatim to women working in predominantly male environments. Or any other case where there's a minority surrounded by a entrenched majority. "It's just how things are" is not a satisfactory approach imho.
I also note that your argument could be applied almost verbatim to women working in predominantly male environments. Or any other case where there's a minority surrounded by a entrenched majority. "It's just how things are" is not a satisfactory approach imho.
The thing about ingrained racism and sexism is that it's rarely done out of malice or in an obvious, "WHOA THATS RACIST/SEXIST MAN," way. It was bullying and a expression of power, whether or not the participants were aware of themselves enough to realize it.
As an American, it's best to understand this.
As an American, it's best to understand this.
What exactly is the difference between 'forced' and 'pressured' in your mind? The two words are practically synonymous.
It doesn't matter whether they physically held her down and poured it into her throat, or that they cajoled her over an extended period into doing it. Either way, she was forced into drinking. Peer pressure is just another way of forcing people to do things they don't want to.
I'm Irish. I'm fully familiar with that kind of drinking culture.
> Explaining to them that you don't drink, for whatever reason, will very likely put the matter to rest quickly.
Obviously that didn't work in this case.
It doesn't matter whether they physically held her down and poured it into her throat, or that they cajoled her over an extended period into doing it. Either way, she was forced into drinking. Peer pressure is just another way of forcing people to do things they don't want to.
I'm Irish. I'm fully familiar with that kind of drinking culture.
> Explaining to them that you don't drink, for whatever reason, will very likely put the matter to rest quickly.
Obviously that didn't work in this case.
If it was "forced", then she would have had absolutely no choice in the matter. It probably wasn't physical, as we've already determined. It likely didn't involve any sort of risk to her job outside of her control, as the original commenter clearly says, "She quit in her 3rd week."
It probably was the typical, purely-verbal, friendly coaxing that oft persistent Americans can engage in. That's what I'd consider "pressure". Aside from a brief and harmless verbal interaction, nobody is coerced into doing anything.
You may have to say "No" a few times, since they'll try to convince you to reconsider in a friendly manner. But they'll respect your decision soon enough.
It's really no different than going to a market in a developing nation, and having to fend off street vendors. They can be persistent, for sure, but there's absolutely no obligation to buy from them, and any interaction with them is almost always totally harmless.
I think this is "incident" is probably being misconstrued and totally blown out of proportion. Had she better understood American culture, and had she merely said, "No, thanks!" a few times, it would've been settled without any hard feelings.
It probably was the typical, purely-verbal, friendly coaxing that oft persistent Americans can engage in. That's what I'd consider "pressure". Aside from a brief and harmless verbal interaction, nobody is coerced into doing anything.
You may have to say "No" a few times, since they'll try to convince you to reconsider in a friendly manner. But they'll respect your decision soon enough.
It's really no different than going to a market in a developing nation, and having to fend off street vendors. They can be persistent, for sure, but there's absolutely no obligation to buy from them, and any interaction with them is almost always totally harmless.
I think this is "incident" is probably being misconstrued and totally blown out of proportion. Had she better understood American culture, and had she merely said, "No, thanks!" a few times, it would've been settled without any hard feelings.
Am I misreading this or are you actually advocating in support of monoculture? I don't think a comment could be more stereotypical of the attitudes at the heart of this problem.
> It's one thing to avoid overt, unjustified discrimination
Right, the more covert, justified kind is really what's best.
I also hope you don't consider deploys a "big" event. I do this multiple times a day (and I know Github does it even more). I'd have liver damage if this was normal.
> It's one thing to avoid overt, unjustified discrimination
Right, the more covert, justified kind is really what's best.
I also hope you don't consider deploys a "big" event. I do this multiple times a day (and I know Github does it even more). I'd have liver damage if this was normal.
> Am I misreading this or are you actually advocating in support of monoculture?
Aren't politically correct companies doing the same thing in the end except it's more like a non-culture than a monoculture?
Aren't politically correct companies doing the same thing in the end except it's more like a non-culture than a monoculture?
I'm having a hard time believing you aren't trolling, but in any case - nobody is taking American culture away from you, or forcing you not to drink your ass off during celebratory events. Notwithstanding that this was a professional environment, where alcohol during work hours is illegal in some places - why pressure someone who isn't into those things to do them? Many Americans are vegans. Will you force them to eat Turkey during Thanksgiving, or else get the fuck out of America?
I think that you've misunderstood my comment just as you've apparently misunderstood American culture.
Instead of trying to truly understand American culture, I think you've just ended up injecting a lot of presumed malice that just isn't there in reality.
What you and your friend see as "pressure", many Americans would consider just being friendly and sociable.
What you see as an unreasonable request, many Americans would see as merely trying to be considerate of others and what they have to smell while at the office.
And as I stated earlier, I'm not even an American. But I do realize that American culture is unique in many ways, and it's far more enjoyable to interact with Americans if you put forth the effort to understand where they're coming from, and why they act the way that they do.
Instead of trying to truly understand American culture, I think you've just ended up injecting a lot of presumed malice that just isn't there in reality.
What you and your friend see as "pressure", many Americans would consider just being friendly and sociable.
What you see as an unreasonable request, many Americans would see as merely trying to be considerate of others and what they have to smell while at the office.
And as I stated earlier, I'm not even an American. But I do realize that American culture is unique in many ways, and it's far more enjoyable to interact with Americans if you put forth the effort to understand where they're coming from, and why they act the way that they do.
Vodka shots in the office, or during work hours, isn't part of American culture. Besides your description of American culture is too simplistic. I get the impression you don't understand American culture, which I guess is understandable since, as you say, you're not American.
[deleted]
> They're discounting thousands of Indian and Asian women
Aren't Indians also Asians?
Aren't Indians also Asians?
In the UK Indians are Asians.
In the rest of the world Asians means Oriental and are separate from Indians.
In the rest of the world Asians means Oriental and are separate from Indians.
That always confused me too. In the UK Asian typically refers to South Asian. In the US I think if you called us South Asians and what you're currently calling Asians East Asians it might make things a little less confusing.
In the American context they're usually spoken of as separate cultural groups.
I'm sympathetic to Github's aims of addressing women's issues and increasing diversity. But as a general rule, in direct proportion to the extent that HR are permitted to step in and formalize something at a place, I am less likely to want to work at that place. I understand the need for processes for handling certain situations or deeply-ingrained challenges. But the more structured things are allowed to become, the more constraining a company feels.
I think in their position they have the choice between making it crystal clear to current employees that they need different moral standards, or doing cycles of firings->hirings to get new employees aligned with their new policies.
If I were a Github employee happy with my job and current colleagues, I'd prefer the former solution.
If I were a Github employee happy with my job and current colleagues, I'd prefer the former solution.
I agree with you. When Github was starting out, they very much believed in overthrowing the traditional hierarchies that limited a company. But now, it seems like they are becoming more and more like what they feared.
Also, on another point, Github believes itself as a very much hacker culture. And if it's a hacker culture, shouldn't they believe in the Hacker manifesto, where they don't discriminate on religion, race, gender, but on their ability to code?
Also, on another point, Github believes itself as a very much hacker culture. And if it's a hacker culture, shouldn't they believe in the Hacker manifesto, where they don't discriminate on religion, race, gender, but on their ability to code?
Any company that tries to throw out traditional processes needs to have a very clear understanding of why those processes/rules existed in the first place, and why they're irrelevant.
Certainly there are differences between highly motivated technical staff and many other professions, but it's not like most companies go around making rules and processes to make their lives harder.
Certainly there are differences between highly motivated technical staff and many other professions, but it's not like most companies go around making rules and processes to make their lives harder.
I agree. In particular, the following line really turned me off GitHub's upcoming culture:
>We’re in the planning stages of designing a diversity and communication training curriculum for GitHub employees with input from Hubbers and external experts. Topics will include diversity training, effective communication, giving and receiving peer feedback, and conflict resolution.
>We’re in the planning stages of designing a diversity and communication training curriculum for GitHub employees with input from Hubbers and external experts. Topics will include diversity training, effective communication, giving and receiving peer feedback, and conflict resolution.
I'm not sure if you're objecting to the topics they're planning to train for, or the perceived formality of the training, but I don't think either needs to hurt the culture if done well.
Communication is incredibly important at any company, but startups often fail to treat it as such, saying "we don't need meetings to get shit done" or "we hire great people so things will just work out".
Some people, through work or life experience, will have no problem giving constructive feedback at appropriate times, and working through differences of opinion. Others will suck at these things. The latter may otherwise be strong contributors - especially if you were hiring for ninja rockstar coding ability and not explicitly for communication skills - so it's worth helping them acquire those skills, both for their own career and for the company.
In particular, some people with conflict-avoiding personalities may have never experienced productive conflict resolution, unless you consider always backing down and feeling increasingly disempowered to be productive.
Now sure, if GitHub HR (or employees) treat this training as a box-ticking exercise, or use it to encourage bland, conflict-free discussion, the culture will nosedive. But I'll give them the benefit of the doubt.
Communication is incredibly important at any company, but startups often fail to treat it as such, saying "we don't need meetings to get shit done" or "we hire great people so things will just work out".
Some people, through work or life experience, will have no problem giving constructive feedback at appropriate times, and working through differences of opinion. Others will suck at these things. The latter may otherwise be strong contributors - especially if you were hiring for ninja rockstar coding ability and not explicitly for communication skills - so it's worth helping them acquire those skills, both for their own career and for the company.
In particular, some people with conflict-avoiding personalities may have never experienced productive conflict resolution, unless you consider always backing down and feeling increasingly disempowered to be productive.
Now sure, if GitHub HR (or employees) treat this training as a box-ticking exercise, or use it to encourage bland, conflict-free discussion, the culture will nosedive. But I'll give them the benefit of the doubt.
Well said. Let's not forget why GitHub is putting such things in place. Had they existed before, they might have avoided all the unpleasantness they (and their former employee) went through (which also led to the CEO's resignation).
Communication, giving and receiving peer feedback, and conflict resolution are all extremely difficult to do well, and almost anyone would benefit from regular training.
It seems like a lot of programmers, engineers, hackers, etc. have a strong case of Dunning-Kruger in these areas.
It seems like a lot of programmers, engineers, hackers, etc. have a strong case of Dunning-Kruger in these areas.
Some interesting things here.
It is interesting to see how many of the failings they admit now are not really gender based but more job role based (although gender undoubtedly plays a part too)
It is interesting to see how many of the failings they admit now are not really gender based but more job role based (although gender undoubtedly plays a part too)
> We’re in the planning stages of designing a diversity and communication training curriculum for GitHub employees with input from Hubbers and external experts.
Anyone have any experience with attending these kinds of things?
Anyone have any experience with attending these kinds of things?
fuck github
I'm not sure how to feel about this. On one hand, it acknowledges that the company truly believes there's something to fix. On the other hand, it ignores the fact of what really happened with Julie and doesn't acknowledge (still) that it went down badly/was their fault.
it ignores the fact of what really happened with Julie
I would just point out that while there were obvious issues at Github, it's not clear to the public (and never will be) exactly what happened there.
I would just point out that while there were obvious issues at Github, it's not clear to the public (and never will be) exactly what happened there.
After the whole Horvath incident, I take what they say with a grain of salt. It's hard changing company culture, especially one that's Bro Code heavy. You can probably make big changes within a small company, but there are currently 239 employees.
https://github.com/blog/1823-results-of-the-github-investiga...
"The investigation found no evidence to support the claims against Tom and his wife of sexual or gender-based harassment or retaliation, or of a sexist or hostile work environment.
...
As to the remaining allegations, the investigation found no evidence of gender-based discrimination, harassment, retaliation, or abuse."
"The investigation found no evidence to support the claims against Tom and his wife of sexual or gender-based harassment or retaliation, or of a sexist or hostile work environment.
...
As to the remaining allegations, the investigation found no evidence of gender-based discrimination, harassment, retaliation, or abuse."
To fill in your ellipsis: "However, while there may have been no legal wrongdoing, the investigator did find evidence of mistakes and errors of judgment. In light of these findings, Tom has submitted his resignation, which the company has accepted."
Although they found no evidence of legal wrongdoing, they found enough general dirt to force a founding CEO to resign. Obviously the public will never know exactly what happened, but an explosive, highly publicized employee departure followed by a CEO's resignation makes you wonder how the company allowed things to go so wrong.
Although they found no evidence of legal wrongdoing, they found enough general dirt to force a founding CEO to resign. Obviously the public will never know exactly what happened, but an explosive, highly publicized employee departure followed by a CEO's resignation makes you wonder how the company allowed things to go so wrong.
An accusation is as good as a finding of guilt in the court of public opinion.
There is zero transparency into this investigation or it's results.