3 ms·

did you read the linked Quora post? it pretty explicitly details that Facebook has a whole list of zero-tolerance "violations" that they will fire you for doing

did you read the linked Quora post? it pretty explicitly details that Facebook has a whole list of zero-tolerance "violations" that they will fire you for doing even once, without warning.

empressplay 11y ago
Legally they need to be "zero-tolerance" policies in order to restrict people's ability to contest firings. But in practice it's expensive to hire people, so while zero-tolerance policies are used to terminate people, it's typically not their first offence (unless another employee has an actionable case related to the employee's behaviour.)
- SeanDav 11y ago
  In the Quora article, there is a reply by an existing Facebook senior manager, who confirms the zero tolerance policy, even stating that people get fired at Facebook for accidentally breaking a policy they were either not aware of, or had forgotten about. Facebook really do apply the policy that ignorance of the law (rules) is not an excuse.
ceejayoz 11y ago
It claims Facebook has a bunch of zero-tolerance violations, but in the same sentence it states that commenting on clothes might be reported (which is very different from a zero-tolerance policy, and quite possibly intended to indicate that "loving the slutty tank top" still counts as sexual harassment even if it doesn't involve touching). Meanwhile, https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11224057 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11224057 claims they have only one zero-tolerance policy, accessing user data. It seems at least as credible as an anonymous Quora post.
kelukelugames 11y ago
I suggest understanding Geller Mann amnesia effect. It's very true of Internet comments, especially about tech companies. “Briefly stated, the Gell-Mann Amnesia effect is as follows. You open the newspaper to an article on some subject you know well. In Murray's case, physics. In mine, show business. You read the article and see the journalist has absolutely no understanding of either the facts or the issues. Often, the article is so wrong it actually presents the story backward—reversing cause and effect. I call these the "wet streets cause rain" stories. Paper's full of them. In any case, you read with exasperation or amusement the multiple errors in a story, and then turn the page to national or international affairs, and read as if the rest of the newspaper was somehow more accurate about Palestine than the baloney you just read. You turn the page, and forget what you know.” ― Michael Crichton
- metaphorm 11y ago
  are you meaning to imply that the author of the Quora post did not understand the reasons behind his/her own termination? I hope you realize that the Quora post linked here is NOT the second hand account of a journalist, but was instead a primary source from an involved party. I don't think the Geller-Mann effect applies to this kind of situation and I find it more than a little strange that you're suggesting it would.
  - kelukelugames 11y ago
    I mean don't blindly believe everything you read on the internet, especially if it triggers your emotions or is about a popular company. HNers are susceptible to sensationalism too.
    - metaphorm 11y ago
      what you're doing now is basically a variation on concern trolling. what you just said to me is something like "I am CONCERNED that you are reacting emotionally due to your biases" and then you go and cite some article about a psychological research effect to try and make your point, by quoting something from a fiction writer speaking about an entirely different scenario that seems to be at-best tangentially related (and that is a very generous interpretation) to this issue. what is your actual point? I would suggest you check your own emotions and biases. maybe you are unduly supportive of FB even in situations where they ought to be scrutinized and deserve to be criticized. edit: now that I've looked into it more, what is even IS the Gell-Man amnesia effect? I can't find any credible sources on this besides the essay Michael Crichton wrote, where he appears to have simply invented this for his own rhetorical purposes.
      - kelukelugames 11y ago
        Damn you touchy.

did you read the linked Quora post? it pretty explicitly details that Facebook has a whole list of zero-tolerance "violations" that they will fire you for doing even once, without warning.

empressplay 11y ago

Legally they need to be "zero-tolerance" policies in order to restrict people's ability to contest firings. But in practice it's expensive to hire people, so while zero-tolerance policies are used to terminate people, it's typically not their first offence (unless another employee has an actionable case related to the employee's behaviour.)

SeanDav 11y ago
In the Quora article, there is a reply by an existing Facebook senior manager, who confirms the zero tolerance policy, even stating that people get fired at Facebook for accidentally breaking a policy they were either not aware of, or had forgotten about. Facebook really do apply the policy that ignorance of the law (rules) is not an excuse.

ceejayoz 11y ago

It claims Facebook has a bunch of zero-tolerance violations, but in the same sentence it states that commenting on clothes might be reported (which is very different from a zero-tolerance policy, and quite possibly intended to indicate that "loving the slutty tank top" still counts as sexual harassment even if it doesn't involve touching). Meanwhile, https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11224057 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11224057 claims they have only one zero-tolerance policy, accessing user data. It seems at least as credible as an anonymous Quora post.

kelukelugames 11y ago

I suggest understanding Geller Mann amnesia effect. It's very true of Internet comments, especially about tech companies. “Briefly stated, the Gell-Mann Amnesia effect is as follows. You open the newspaper to an article on some subject you know well. In Murray's case, physics. In mine, show business. You read the article and see the journalist has absolutely no understanding of either the facts or the issues. Often, the article is so wrong it actually presents the story backward—reversing cause and effect. I call these the "wet streets cause rain" stories. Paper's full of them. In any case, you read with exasperation or amusement the multiple errors in a story, and then turn the page to national or international affairs, and read as if the rest of the newspaper was somehow more accurate about Palestine than the baloney you just read. You turn the page, and forget what you know.” ― Michael Crichton

metaphorm 11y ago
are you meaning to imply that the author of the Quora post did not understand the reasons behind his/her own termination? I hope you realize that the Quora post linked here is NOT the second hand account of a journalist, but was instead a primary source from an involved party. I don't think the Geller-Mann effect applies to this kind of situation and I find it more than a little strange that you're suggesting it would.
- kelukelugames 11y ago
  I mean don't blindly believe everything you read on the internet, especially if it triggers your emotions or is about a popular company. HNers are susceptible to sensationalism too.
  - metaphorm 11y ago
    what you're doing now is basically a variation on concern trolling. what you just said to me is something like "I am CONCERNED that you are reacting emotionally due to your biases" and then you go and cite some article about a psychological research effect to try and make your point, by quoting something from a fiction writer speaking about an entirely different scenario that seems to be at-best tangentially related (and that is a very generous interpretation) to this issue. what is your actual point? I would suggest you check your own emotions and biases. maybe you are unduly supportive of FB even in situations where they ought to be scrutinized and deserve to be criticized. edit: now that I've looked into it more, what is even IS the Gell-Man amnesia effect? I can't find any credible sources on this besides the essay Michael Crichton wrote, where he appears to have simply invented this for his own rhetorical purposes.
    - kelukelugames 11y ago
      Damn you touchy.