37 ms·

Ask a Female Engineer: Employees with Kids and Relationships at Work

144 points by cbcowans 10y ago

cbcowans 10y ago
Hi! Cadran here from YC. If you'd like to anonymously ask a question, please email ask@ycombinator.com or post it here. Thanks!
- pmiller2 10y ago
  I'd like to see some thoughts on "unlimited vacation." How many of the ladies work at companies with this policy, and how do they decide how much to take?
  - cbcowans 10y ago
    Thanks for asking! I'll add it to our list of questions.
    - chris_7 10y ago
      You should also do "undefined vacation" - the company that I work has, as far as I can tell, no vacation policy. People do take vacation, but it has never been mentioned as a coherent thing. Another good one would be alcohol and alcohol related events... I really see no reason for those to be in the workplace, since they're not work. I am male but I hear so many stories from (non-engineer) female friends about creepers in bars, so I worry about that sort of thing moving into the workplace.
- Trombone12 10y ago
  Could you edit the posts so its easier to navigate the series? Currently one has to search HN to find posts other than the first one.
Mz 10y ago
If you’re going to have a policy on employee romantic relationships, my suggestion would be to focus on relationships where one partner is in a position of authority over the other ... And yes, this policy should be clearly spelled out in a company handbook – it shouldn’t be something your team is confused about or has to ask about. This pretty closely describes the situation at the Fortune 500 company I worked at for a time. I thought it worked pretty well.
- gkya 10y ago
  >> Dorothy : I’ve never seen policy on employee dating that was effective. I’ve seen policies that made sense in theory – i.e. like don’t date within your reporting chain – that lead to bad outcomes in practice – people hiding their relationship.
  - Mz 10y ago
    I sure as hell do not want my boss asking me out. Ever. I do not want that kind of situation at work and I am totally fine with people being fired for "inappropriate relationships" as happened in my department per the company policy.
    - gkya 10y ago
      When you start with "I" you can say anything, but with an objective look I'd say everything is fine as long as it does not affect the business itself, i.e., if they continue to do properly as before their own jobs. A per-case approach is way better thus.
      - tbrownaw 10y ago
        is fine as long as it does not affect the business itself, i.e., if they continue to do properly as before their own jobs. There are other ways things could affect the business. There could be a risk of getting sued, there could be morale issues related to accusations of someone "sleeping their way to the top", there could be reputational problems making the company less attractive to potential new employees, etc.
rmchugh 10y ago
The thing about a Netflix room for sick kids really reminded how good we've got things in Denmark. I have two days off every time a kid gets sick, no questions asked, as does my partner. I work in the public sector though, so I'm not sure what the standard arrangement is in the private sector.
- _delirium 10y ago
  I believe even in the private sector at least one day is typical ("barnets første sygedag"), because the union framework agreements of the major unions include it as a standard clause.
  - rmchugh 10y ago
    Right, but are most developers in the private sector covered by a collective agreement?
- clifanatic 10y ago
  Well, the reality in America is that in most places you can take time off if your kid gets sick... you'll just be "downsized" during the next "reorganization" if you ever do.
  - cookiecaper 10y ago
    You almost had it here. In America, most employers of professionals are flexible, sympathetic and understanding. They'll usually give you the time off without further ramifications. Just because the law doesn't require it doesn't mean it doesn't happen.
    - shas3 10y ago
      There's no correct answer to this. But, from personal experience, there are companies and roles in which too many sick days and even maternity leave can shaft your promotion. They usually give fuzzy reasons like "you weren't fully present," etc. and won't necessarily directly say "you took too many sick days to care for your kid!" There is an implicit assumption that at certain early-career roles you are childless and managers and peers at such levels are quite poor at accommodating working parents.
Spooky23 10y ago
> Never assume that all your employees are straight, all your employees only date one person at a time, all of your employees define dating the same way you do, or that you’ll know if your employees are dating. I think a flat prohibition of romantic relationships in your company is going to be very hard to enforce; most likely, your employees are not going to disclose their relationships. Red Flag. Key advice: don't shit where you eat. The problem with these sorts of things is that people have feelings and often react poorly when things implode. If you have people with their varying views of what's ok and what isn't doing their thing, you're going to have a big problem on your hands. The corner cases are really painful to deal with. My wife had one where an ambitious female working for her was sleeping with 4-5 directors, created awkward situations, then started a lawsuit/eeoc complaint. The three months of depositions were lots of fun. I witnessed one where two high-level director level people were engaged, which was great, until the male was discovered to be also "dating" a subordinate. He had to transfer, but there was nowhere to go due to his level, so he got canned. It was a bad situation on every dimension.
- sbov 10y ago
  The point is people will shit where they eat, regardless of how much you like it. To that point, what was the dating policy at your wife's company?
  - Spooky23 10y ago
    I believe it was no personal relationships within the reporting chain. That's pretty common, those types of asymmetrical relationships are fodder for harassment complaints.
    - enraged_camel 10y ago
      Yeah, people dating their equals is fine. People dating their superiors or underlings is a huge red flag.
      - tnecniv 10y ago
ng12 10y ago
> It was a big relief that I could take a sick child with me to work (of course only when the illness was not serious). Please don't bring a sick person into the office for any reason. This is why work-from-home policies are so important.
- mason240 10y ago
  My daycare has a policy where kids have to go home if their temps are over a certain number, and can't come back for 24 hours, even if they are not sick. I have to take a handful of days off a year to stay home with a kid who isn't sick. You also have to remember that little kids frequently get sick from things adults are already immune to. Both of our kids went to daycare at about 6 months, both were frequently sick for that first month with things there were exposed to for the first time.
  - dbg31415 10y ago
    This just isn't true. Kids' developing immune systems enable them to pick up things that we would be immune to, then cultivate those things until they reach a basically a weaponized status. Kids are all kinds of infectious to adults.
    - x0x0 10y ago
      I've never in my adult life been sick so frequently as when I shared an office with a parent who'd moved his young school age kids from the east coast to the west. I really liked him, but the experience was awful. Every 8 weeks I was sick.
  - maccard 10y ago
    > You also have to remember that little kids frequently get sick from things adults are already immune to. And they also spread things that many adults (and children) are severely impaired by. A "mild" chest infection to you or your child is a cough, to me it's a week in bed and antibiotics.
  - jedberg 10y ago
Grishnakh 10y ago
>It’s important that employees should be comfortable disclosing non-monogamous or non-heterosexual relationships to their managers or the appropriate HR personnel without fear of reprisals or malicious gossip. I'm all for this personally, but that's simply not possible if the managers or HR personnel are religious conservatives. Maybe we need policies that people in these positions of power have to identify their persuasions as far as religion and values, and allow employees to select better managers and HR people to deal with.
- nkrisc 10y ago
  The issue is real but I think your solution is problematic for exactly the same reason as the original problem.
- genzoman 10y ago
  i think we need a policy where people start to understand problems as human issues, that ALL humans can experience and not issues related to a particular group. e.g. "but that's simply not possible if the managers or HR personnel are religious conservatives".
  - Grishnakh 10y ago
    That's not possible. Religious conservatives are fundamentally opposed to same-sex relationships and non-monogamous relationships. If they're not, then they're not really following their religion and they're not really conservative. You can't have it both ways. People who are already and admittedly prejudiced against others, for things like skin color or relationship type, cannot be trusted to be impartial.
    - 67726e 10y ago
      You can put aside your personal views at work. I don't give people shit or favor for their views in either direction. It's called being a professional.
      - 10y ago
balls187 10y ago
This Q&A Series seems like it would have the opposite of it's intended effect. You want to ask woman engineers about family matters? That seems analagous to giving your wife a vacuum cleaner for her birthday.
- Mz 10y ago
  It isn't ideal, but there seems to be no good path forward. If this simply makes women more visible and more empowered to talk on HN, that will be a step forward.
  - ng12 10y ago
    Are women not empowered to talk on HN? I feel like it's pseudo-anonymous.
    - Mz 10y ago
      I seem to be the most "prominent" openly female member in terms of forum participation. My research indicates that the short answer is "no." It has gotten better over time, but there is lots of room for improvement.
      - 2muchcoffeeman 10y ago
        What exactly does 'not being empowered to talk' mean in a place where no one can really tell anyone's gender and everything is online? I'm just taking your word you're a woman and you have as much opportunity to post or reply as anyone else.
        Mz 10y ago
        Women get responded to differently here in ways that women themselves report is problematic. (http://micheleincalifornia.blogspot.com/2014/01/oh-my-god-its-girl.html http://micheleincalifornia.blogspot.com/2014/01/oh-my-god-it...) There appear to be no women on the leaderboard. The leaderboard lists 100 names. The top of it is stable, but, my understanding is that your name drops off of it if you are inactive for X amount of time. The bottom is not stable. Names appear and disappear. So there are likely something over 100 members with enough karma to qualify for the leaderboard, at some points during the year. I appear to have the highest karma of any openly female member and I am thousands short of the leaderboard. I posted a question or two trying to find out who was female here. Some women created accounts in order to reply. So, there appear to be a lot of women who lurk and read but do not feel comfortable participating. I ended up gathering some objective data to the best of my ability because the social piece is pretty opaque here. I did not have an agenda initially. But I was experiencing a lot of friction and there was soft social evidence suggesting I was "prominent" for a woman here at a time when I had something like 3000 or 4000 karma. I put that data on my blog. For example: http://micheleincalifornia.blogspot.com/2015/01/some-raw-data-on-prominence-of-women-on.html http://micheleincalifornia.blogspot.com/2015/01/some-raw-dat... I can't prove any of this. If you want to be pedantic, hey, you win. But as a woman who ended up inadvertently researching how prominent I was because I was having what I felt was an excessive amount of friction for a "nobody," my opinion is that a) HN is not very welcoming of women and b) it has gotten better over time and is continuing to improve. Do with that opinion as you wish. I don't feel like getting dragged into some stupid argument where multiple men verbally beat on me while swearing women don't face challenges here. Such situations never seem to strike the multiple men engaging in the pile on as either ironic nor as de facto evidence supporting my assertion that there are issues.
dominotw 10y ago
Small countries which lucked out free oil seem to have the best social policies.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- Prisen 10y ago
  Denmark doesn't have any oil, you're probably thinking of Norway.
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
  - dominotw 10y ago
    plenty of oil and gas from north sea, second biggest of their exports.
- pravda 10y ago
  Denmark has free oil? I think you're thinking of Norway. Danes have melancholia.
- Symbiote 10y ago
  Do Germany and Britain count as small countries? The situation is similar.
- sctb 10y ago
  We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12807590 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12807590 and marked it off-topic.
nserrino 10y ago
I don't get this... Male engineers have kids and date too. Female employees, engineer or not, get pregnant. "As a female engineer" I would prefer if people -- including fellow women -- stopped treating us like we are some kind of exotic species.
- foobarian 10y ago
  I don't get it either. I'm a happy Dad engineer but I have no idea what I'm doing and could use this kind of testimonials/advice too!
- cbcowans 10y ago
  The questions and answers here aren't necessarily specific to women. The idea of the series is just to ask women engineers questions and see what they say.
  - mcv 10y ago
    But it seems rather stereotyping to start out with kids and relationships for a series about female engineers. Or do "Ask a male or non-gender specific engineer" series also start with those questions? I mean, they're important questions, but the stereotype seems rather blatant here.
    - deleted 10y ago
      [deleted]
    - emelski 10y ago
      This is the fourth post in the series, not the start. Previous posts: http://themacro.com/articles/2016/09/introducing-ask-a-female-engineer/ http://themacro.com/articles/2016/09/introducing-ask-a-femal... http://themacro.com/articles/2016/09/ask-a-female-engineer-2/ http://themacro.com/articles/2016/09/ask-a-female-engineer-2... http://themacro.com/articles/2016/10/ask-a-female-engineer-3/ http://themacro.com/articles/2016/10/ask-a-female-engineer-3...
    - kohanz 10y ago
dbg31415 10y ago
Quick question, what does being a female engineer have to do with the answers here? Aren't they the same answers for everyone? 1 Relationships - Don't shit where you eat. End of story. If you work with someone don't fuck them. Far as I'm concerned anyone who fucks a coworker is a retard who should be canned for having piss poor judgement. "But, as long as it's not in the command chain..." No, it's always an extremely risky shitty idea, and has no value for your company or team. It will cause drama. 2 Kids - I don't care about your personal life. Meaning I don't think you deserve special policies or treatment just because you opted to have offspring. Everyone should work from home when sick, if they do it so often that it has and impact on their ability to produce, it should be grounds for a demotion or termination. Anything can be planned around, don't fuck over your team because you have poor time management, or planning abilities. I don't care if you're a male or a female -- that sucks. So get a sitter, get a backup sitter if you have to, don't ever use your kids as an excuse. Book out time on your calendar and get your work done as needed. Past that, I don't care if you have a kid, dog, 18 transgender ponies... your personal life isn't any of my business.
- simonsarris 10y ago
  > Far as I'm concerned anyone who fucks a coworker is a retard who should be canned for having piss poor judgement. It worked out OK for Bill Gates, who together with Melinda went on to create the largest transparently operated private foundation in the world. I suspect for some people, working well together means just that, and can extend to other relationships. You call it shitting where you eat, they call it forming the world's best power couple. In more mundane terms, it works out OK, I suspect, for many of the couples who decide to found businesses together, from startups to bakeries.
  - jandrese 10y ago
    It certainly can work, but it also can end very badly with messy lawsuits. In general, it is best to avoid relationships within the chain of command. Obviously that's not possible when you're in a tiny company and dating the CEO, but in general it is good advice.
- 10y ago
bettyx1138 10y ago
"ladies" is old-fashioned and patronizing. say "women" instead. :)
- 67726e 10y ago
  What's patronizing about the word "ladies"?
  - BinaryIdiot 10y ago
    So I'm curious as well but I know many female friends who prefer to be called a lady / ladies so I'm not sure you can necessarily win when you attempt to converse with someone and you have zero context about them. I think people need to be more forgiving with most labels when the conversation happens anonymously without context of that user's preference. Now if you referred to them as "bitches" that would be a problem but I feel like we can be forgiving for "ladies", even if a majority of women do not like it. Right? At least that's what I think.
    - projektir 10y ago
      I don't particularly care for the term "lady", but I would never consider it patronizing or an insult. I agree that people need to be more forgiving, this is just not worth the effort to worry about it.
  - 2muchcoffeeman 10y ago
    Nothing. It is a term generally used out of respect or formality like gentleman or Lord. Though I guess there are usages where it is just a gendered pronoun. The only context I've seen where 'lady' might be offensive is when some men enter a room full of other men and addresses them like "hello ladies".
- pmiller2 10y ago
  I'll be sure to inform PyLadies post haste. ;)
- jotux 10y ago
bettyx1138 10y ago
I've worked at places that allowed many of the flexibilities mentioned. I sometimes felt that it was more socially acceptable for men and women with kids to use the WFH and leave early flexibilities than it was for those of us who are child-free.
- beachstartup 10y ago
  yes, it's a double standard. usually the people who make the rules have kids also, so this is how it plays out.
  - m_t 10y ago
    I've also heard that most of those rule making people were at some point children themselves. It's a vicious circle really.
- dominotw 10y ago
  It would be better if it people were encouraged to not reveal the reason why they want to WFH
- oldmanjay 10y ago
  People often "feel" all sorts of rules that aren't real, then modify their behavior based on these unreal rules they've perceived, then harshly judge others for not living in the exact same dreamworld. I'm endlessly amused by it.
mcv 10y ago
The first thing that strikes me is that the first two questions asked of a female engineer are about kids and relationships. Of course those things are relevant to some women (though hardly all), but they're just as relevant to men. I know tons of male engineers with kids (I'm one of them) who have to leave early to pick up kids from day care, or suddenly can't come in because their child is sick. Many work 4 days a week in order to have more time for their family.
- nsavaaytrev 10y ago
  I think you're missing the point of this series. I think the point is to get women in tech to answer questions about their experiences (as women). I don't think it's meant to be limited to them talking about experiences only relevant to females. But you're right that many of the questions could be asked of men too.
- Trombone12 10y ago
  This is the fourth instalment of the series, the first question answered was actually: "On a typical day, how conscious are you of being a female engineer and can you tell us about the ways in which you feel (or are made to feel) this way?"
logicallee 10y ago
[retracted]
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
- sctb 10y ago
  We ask that you please don't do this because it sabotages the discussion thread. We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12809769 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12809769 and marked it off-topic.
Disruptive_Dave 10y ago
Amen. I've consistently asked people how it makes sense to (supposedly) combat sexism with....more sexism. It's ridiculous. Just treat people as the people they are (in other words, please also don't ignore physical differences in genders). Every time I see someone start another "femgineer" or "girl boss!!!" company I cringe at anyone who celebrates that as progress. /rant
- snowwrestler 10y ago
  Sexism is a power imbalance based on sex (i.e. gender). Just acknowledging gender is not sexism. A woman who volunteers her time to answer some random questions is not being subjected to sexism. And by the way, since it is a power imbalance based on sex (i.e gender), you can't combat it without acknowledging and discussing sex (i.e. gender). I keep saying (i.e. gender) so people don't think I'm talking about the fun activity that sometimes makes a baby.
  - Disruptive_Dave 10y ago
    Actually, it's prejudice and discrimination based on gender. "Femgineering" and women's only clubs/sites/services are doing just that. It irks me that the same path that led us to today's problems is being walked again, just in a different direction. (Obviously this is a WAY more complex scenario than can be handled in HN comments, but that's my two cents.)
    - snowwrestler 10y ago
      There's no prejudice or discrimination at work if some women volunteer to answer questions from the Internet.
- sctb 10y ago
  We detached this flagged subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12808368 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12808368 and marked it off-topic.
rustynails 10y ago
Pick a criteria, any meaningful criteria. Now line a room full of people up in order of that criteria. What do you see? I see a mixed line of races, genders, heights, skin colours, etc. Why am I pointing this out? Because while this article sounds wise, it's not. It's also a shallow thought pattern of generalising. A woman's view is somehow different from a man's. Really? Someone who has cancer (as an example) might want to work from home (even IF they're male). The mindset of this article is baffling (especially when the article isn't pushing gender discrimination, unlike many similar articles). Nobody should be penalised for taking slabs of time off work. True! Just penalise the ones that don't take time off (ie. by ignoring those consistently available as providing no extra value), or better yet, put everyone on part time! In reality, a smart boss/business will promote someone who is there when needed! The author of this article started with a prejudiced premise (ie. sees the world as genders). Considering that starting point, the article was unusually inclusive for an article that thinks in genders. However, I don't really care about a person's gender. So, articles like this stand out as demonstrating shallow and flawed thinking. As I once said to my wife "why don't people ask about redheads in engineering?"
- sfaf 10y ago
  Do you have an ethical objection to surveying under-represented groups on general questions? To me this is no different than "ask a black engineer, ask college dropout engineer, ask an engineer working in a developing country, ask a house husband, ask an engineer who grew up in the projects, ask an engineer who didn't study cs, etc." The point is for me to get a perspective from a background that I don't have. To me that adds value.
  - Trombone12 10y ago
    Wow, that your comment got downvotes is baffling! Well, not really. But it should be! I certainly agree with you, its really weird that people think its wrong to ask women for their opinion. Maybe they just had a really bad experience on a date when they asked what she wanted to eat? (badom-tsh!) Going along on that tangent, who here has a male spouse that has a really hard time deciding what to eat? (I know enough examples in the other direction, thank you for asking. You are of course welcome to come with examples outside the binay, the more diverse the merrier)
brhsiao 10y ago
Unrelated, but as a 21 year old (male!) who knows little about society, human psychology, etc., can I ask with sincerity what is probably a really dumb question? Why do companies/society need to accommodate people who have kids? Why are maternity/paternity leave a thing? How come we don't expect people to price the fact that having a kid is a lot of work that will inherently set their life back into their decision of whether to have one? Is it really so "evil" when one makes the assumption that someone with kids is on balance less dedicated, more tired, more preoccupied, etc. than someone without? Can't we rephrase that as, someone who has a matter in their life they need to spend hours a day on will have less time for other things? Is that discrimination?
- snowwrestler 10y ago
  Where do you see yourself in about 30 years? Would you like to have a healthy society, innovation in arts and sciences, a strong economy, a strong national defense, etc.? Well, the kids who are babies today will be providing that for you--even if you don't have kids yourself. That's one reason childrearing gets special treatment in policy. Another more practical reason is that quite a lot of people have kids, and so families make up a large block of votes in our democracy.
  - brhsiao 10y ago
    I get that humans should have kids, and obviously it's terrible (and should be fixed) whenever kids are neglected. We should have (more, better) programs for this. But why does it fall on companies to create an "environment" that treats people with kids the same way when in fact their circumstances are different? During the YC/Thiel thing, I saw someone cite "I would be reluctant to start a startup with a woman who had small children, or was likely to have them soon", as an example of a morally outrageous statement. But surely people with small kids are more preoccupied?
    - tunah2 10y ago
      Because kids do better when their parents take care of them, and "programs" can't replace this. Companies have to help out because they're part of society. In exchange they get to do things like limit their liability and collectively enter into contracts.
knorker 10y ago
This entire article says that women cannot work as much or as well as men, because they instead choose to spend a significant amount of their life being parents. You only have 100% of your time. If this article is accurate, then why should I as an employer hire women? They will be worse employees than a man would, apparently. Yes, there is value to diversity of opinions and experiences, but this article tells me that the trade-off cannot possibly be worth it.
- balls187 10y ago
  The burden of parenthood doesn't always fall solely on mom. I rushed home from work early Tuesday because my son had been crying non-stop for 3 hours (he had stomach issues, which caused him to enter a negative feedback loop). My wife and I have a plan in place, she is 1st responder, solely because she commutes by car, and is 20 minutes away. However, she is out of town at a conference, so I am the primary parent on call. That is also to say nothing of what it's like to be a middle aged person and have to care for an elderly parent. Basically, life happens, and work needs to account for that. If you as an employer are lucky, you can be in a field that can easily replace Humans with Robots/Computers. As a boss myself, I let my team know, they can have as much time necessary to handle their personal lives, as long as they deliver.
  - knorker 10y ago
    > The burden of parenthood doesn't always fall solely on mom. I know. I'm only saying that this is what the article says. This article appears to attempt to make employees cater to moms, but I'm saying it's failing catastrophically.
  - knorker 10y ago
    (separate comment, because this is not related to genders) > Basically, life happens, and work needs to account for that. I'm not sure that it does need to do that. Let's say someone has three kids and is a single parent. This person cannot be the best at what they do. It's just not possible. That guy or gal who has to leave at 4pm sharp every day to pick up from child care and then needs to care for the children can not compete with someone who does not and has the same passion for work, and abilities. Who has read more books, who has gone to more conferences, networked, and actually coded, after 10 years of this. All else being equal? I think it's up to the state to encourage raising children if it wants, but let's not pretend that someone who's been away for years is as good as the same person who has not. Some countries legally mandate that parental leave MUST be counted as "work experience", with promotions and salary increases as if they were working. (e.g. Sweden, with its 400+ day parental leave) (don't counter with "someone really good and a parent is better than a mediocre one without children", since you'll find that I said nothing implying otherwise, because of course that's true)
sokoloff 10y ago
> That same CEO would go to my house and stay with my kids when we had emergency technical issues requiring all of the tech staff to stay late. Bravo for that CEO! Things like that engender crazy amounts of respect and loyalty.
Trombone12 10y ago
Honestly I upvote this simply because women get asked and can reply uninterrupted, I don't actually care all that much about what they say just that they have been given the space to say it (as none of these engineers are the one I married).
jeffrom 10y ago
If you agree that there has historically been a disparity between the genders and you agree that there is currently an gender disparity in the workplace, it is not much of jump to believe that elevating women could help to correct that problem. I see a lot of comments on posts like these claiming that it is sexist or just reproducing the problem to give women visibility or an advantage in the workplace. Usually these comments are supported by anecdotal evidence. I think these comments are supporting the status quo. Given the mountains of evidence showing gender disparity today in hiring, salary, etc, as well as the historical fact of women's position vs men over the last few thousand years, shouldn't we be leaning in the direction of trying things out?
Hondor 10y ago
I was expecting this to be a complaint that the only questions people ask female engineers are about kids and dating, instead of engineering. Who can tell which way public opinion will spin these days!
- Trombone12 10y ago
  This is the fourth instalment of the series, so these weren't the first question asked to the engineers. But yes, a lot of comments have been from people not seeing the reference to the earlier parts in the beginning of the post, or seen the earlier threads on HN, and reacting like you.
- Trombone12 10y ago
  This is the fourth instalment of the series, so these weren't the first question asked to the engineers. But yes, a lot of comments have been from people not seeing the reference to the earlier parts in the beginning of the post, or seen the earlier threads on HN, and reacting like you.

144 points by cbcowans 10y ago

Hi! Cadran here from YC. If you'd like to anonymously ask a question, please email ask@ycombinator.com or post it here. Thanks!

pmiller2 10y ago
I'd like to see some thoughts on "unlimited vacation." How many of the ladies work at companies with this policy, and how do they decide how much to take?
- cbcowans 10y ago
  Thanks for asking! I'll add it to our list of questions.
  - chris_7 10y ago
    You should also do "undefined vacation" - the company that I work has, as far as I can tell, no vacation policy. People do take vacation, but it has never been mentioned as a coherent thing. Another good one would be alcohol and alcohol related events... I really see no reason for those to be in the workplace, since they're not work. I am male but I hear so many stories from (non-engineer) female friends about creepers in bars, so I worry about that sort of thing moving into the workplace.
Trombone12 10y ago
Could you edit the posts so its easier to navigate the series? Currently one has to search HN to find posts other than the first one.

Mz 10y ago

If you’re going to have a policy on employee romantic relationships, my suggestion would be to focus on relationships where one partner is in a position of authority over the other ... And yes, this policy should be clearly spelled out in a company handbook – it shouldn’t be something your team is confused about or has to ask about. This pretty closely describes the situation at the Fortune 500 company I worked at for a time. I thought it worked pretty well.

gkya 10y ago
>> Dorothy : I’ve never seen policy on employee dating that was effective. I’ve seen policies that made sense in theory – i.e. like don’t date within your reporting chain – that lead to bad outcomes in practice – people hiding their relationship.
- Mz 10y ago
  I sure as hell do not want my boss asking me out. Ever. I do not want that kind of situation at work and I am totally fine with people being fired for "inappropriate relationships" as happened in my department per the company policy.
  - gkya 10y ago
    When you start with "I" you can say anything, but with an objective look I'd say everything is fine as long as it does not affect the business itself, i.e., if they continue to do properly as before their own jobs. A per-case approach is way better thus.
    - tbrownaw 10y ago
      is fine as long as it does not affect the business itself, i.e., if they continue to do properly as before their own jobs. There are other ways things could affect the business. There could be a risk of getting sued, there could be morale issues related to accusations of someone "sleeping their way to the top", there could be reputational problems making the company less attractive to potential new employees, etc.

rmchugh 10y ago

The thing about a Netflix room for sick kids really reminded how good we've got things in Denmark. I have two days off every time a kid gets sick, no questions asked, as does my partner. I work in the public sector though, so I'm not sure what the standard arrangement is in the private sector.

_delirium 10y ago
I believe even in the private sector at least one day is typical ("barnets første sygedag"), because the union framework agreements of the major unions include it as a standard clause.
- rmchugh 10y ago
  Right, but are most developers in the private sector covered by a collective agreement?
clifanatic 10y ago
Well, the reality in America is that in most places you can take time off if your kid gets sick... you'll just be "downsized" during the next "reorganization" if you ever do.
- cookiecaper 10y ago
  You almost had it here. In America, most employers of professionals are flexible, sympathetic and understanding. They'll usually give you the time off without further ramifications. Just because the law doesn't require it doesn't mean it doesn't happen.
  - shas3 10y ago
    There's no correct answer to this. But, from personal experience, there are companies and roles in which too many sick days and even maternity leave can shaft your promotion. They usually give fuzzy reasons like "you weren't fully present," etc. and won't necessarily directly say "you took too many sick days to care for your kid!" There is an implicit assumption that at certain early-career roles you are childless and managers and peers at such levels are quite poor at accommodating working parents.

Spooky23 10y ago

> Never assume that all your employees are straight, all your employees only date one person at a time, all of your employees define dating the same way you do, or that you’ll know if your employees are dating. I think a flat prohibition of romantic relationships in your company is going to be very hard to enforce; most likely, your employees are not going to disclose their relationships. Red Flag. Key advice: don't shit where you eat. The problem with these sorts of things is that people have feelings and often react poorly when things implode. If you have people with their varying views of what's ok and what isn't doing their thing, you're going to have a big problem on your hands. The corner cases are really painful to deal with. My wife had one where an ambitious female working for her was sleeping with 4-5 directors, created awkward situations, then started a lawsuit/eeoc complaint. The three months of depositions were lots of fun. I witnessed one where two high-level director level people were engaged, which was great, until the male was discovered to be also "dating" a subordinate. He had to transfer, but there was nowhere to go due to his level, so he got canned. It was a bad situation on every dimension.

sbov 10y ago
The point is people will shit where they eat, regardless of how much you like it. To that point, what was the dating policy at your wife's company?
- Spooky23 10y ago
  I believe it was no personal relationships within the reporting chain. That's pretty common, those types of asymmetrical relationships are fodder for harassment complaints.
  - enraged_camel 10y ago
    Yeah, people dating their equals is fine. People dating their superiors or underlings is a huge red flag.
    - tnecniv 10y ago

ng12 10y ago

> It was a big relief that I could take a sick child with me to work (of course only when the illness was not serious). Please don't bring a sick person into the office for any reason. This is why work-from-home policies are so important.

mason240 10y ago
My daycare has a policy where kids have to go home if their temps are over a certain number, and can't come back for 24 hours, even if they are not sick. I have to take a handful of days off a year to stay home with a kid who isn't sick. You also have to remember that little kids frequently get sick from things adults are already immune to. Both of our kids went to daycare at about 6 months, both were frequently sick for that first month with things there were exposed to for the first time.
- dbg31415 10y ago
  This just isn't true. Kids' developing immune systems enable them to pick up things that we would be immune to, then cultivate those things until they reach a basically a weaponized status. Kids are all kinds of infectious to adults.
  - x0x0 10y ago
    I've never in my adult life been sick so frequently as when I shared an office with a parent who'd moved his young school age kids from the east coast to the west. I really liked him, but the experience was awful. Every 8 weeks I was sick.
- maccard 10y ago
  > You also have to remember that little kids frequently get sick from things adults are already immune to. And they also spread things that many adults (and children) are severely impaired by. A "mild" chest infection to you or your child is a cough, to me it's a week in bed and antibiotics.
- jedberg 10y ago

Grishnakh 10y ago

>It’s important that employees should be comfortable disclosing non-monogamous or non-heterosexual relationships to their managers or the appropriate HR personnel without fear of reprisals or malicious gossip. I'm all for this personally, but that's simply not possible if the managers or HR personnel are religious conservatives. Maybe we need policies that people in these positions of power have to identify their persuasions as far as religion and values, and allow employees to select better managers and HR people to deal with.

nkrisc 10y ago
The issue is real but I think your solution is problematic for exactly the same reason as the original problem.
genzoman 10y ago
i think we need a policy where people start to understand problems as human issues, that ALL humans can experience and not issues related to a particular group. e.g. "but that's simply not possible if the managers or HR personnel are religious conservatives".
- Grishnakh 10y ago
  That's not possible. Religious conservatives are fundamentally opposed to same-sex relationships and non-monogamous relationships. If they're not, then they're not really following their religion and they're not really conservative. You can't have it both ways. People who are already and admittedly prejudiced against others, for things like skin color or relationship type, cannot be trusted to be impartial.
  - 67726e 10y ago
    You can put aside your personal views at work. I don't give people shit or favor for their views in either direction. It's called being a professional.
    - 10y ago

balls187 10y ago

This Q&A Series seems like it would have the opposite of it's intended effect. You want to ask woman engineers about family matters? That seems analagous to giving your wife a vacuum cleaner for her birthday.

Mz 10y ago
It isn't ideal, but there seems to be no good path forward. If this simply makes women more visible and more empowered to talk on HN, that will be a step forward.
- ng12 10y ago
  Are women not empowered to talk on HN? I feel like it's pseudo-anonymous.
  - Mz 10y ago
    I seem to be the most "prominent" openly female member in terms of forum participation. My research indicates that the short answer is "no." It has gotten better over time, but there is lots of room for improvement.
    - 2muchcoffeeman 10y ago
      What exactly does 'not being empowered to talk' mean in a place where no one can really tell anyone's gender and everything is online? I'm just taking your word you're a woman and you have as much opportunity to post or reply as anyone else.
      - Mz 10y ago
        Women get responded to differently here in ways that women themselves report is problematic. (http://micheleincalifornia.blogspot.com/2014/01/oh-my-god-its-girl.html http://micheleincalifornia.blogspot.com/2014/01/oh-my-god-it...) There appear to be no women on the leaderboard. The leaderboard lists 100 names. The top of it is stable, but, my understanding is that your name drops off of it if you are inactive for X amount of time. The bottom is not stable. Names appear and disappear. So there are likely something over 100 members with enough karma to qualify for the leaderboard, at some points during the year. I appear to have the highest karma of any openly female member and I am thousands short of the leaderboard. I posted a question or two trying to find out who was female here. Some women created accounts in order to reply. So, there appear to be a lot of women who lurk and read but do not feel comfortable participating. I ended up gathering some objective data to the best of my ability because the social piece is pretty opaque here. I did not have an agenda initially. But I was experiencing a lot of friction and there was soft social evidence suggesting I was "prominent" for a woman here at a time when I had something like 3000 or 4000 karma. I put that data on my blog. For example: http://micheleincalifornia.blogspot.com/2015/01/some-raw-data-on-prominence-of-women-on.html http://micheleincalifornia.blogspot.com/2015/01/some-raw-dat... I can't prove any of this. If you want to be pedantic, hey, you win. But as a woman who ended up inadvertently researching how prominent I was because I was having what I felt was an excessive amount of friction for a "nobody," my opinion is that a) HN is not very welcoming of women and b) it has gotten better over time and is continuing to improve. Do with that opinion as you wish. I don't feel like getting dragged into some stupid argument where multiple men verbally beat on me while swearing women don't face challenges here. Such situations never seem to strike the multiple men engaging in the pile on as either ironic nor as de facto evidence supporting my assertion that there are issues.

dominotw 10y ago

Small countries which lucked out free oil seem to have the best social policies.

deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
Prisen 10y ago
Denmark doesn't have any oil, you're probably thinking of Norway.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- dominotw 10y ago
  plenty of oil and gas from north sea, second biggest of their exports.
pravda 10y ago
Denmark has free oil? I think you're thinking of Norway. Danes have melancholia.
Symbiote 10y ago
Do Germany and Britain count as small countries? The situation is similar.
sctb 10y ago
We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12807590 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12807590 and marked it off-topic.

nserrino 10y ago

I don't get this... Male engineers have kids and date too. Female employees, engineer or not, get pregnant. "As a female engineer" I would prefer if people -- including fellow women -- stopped treating us like we are some kind of exotic species.

foobarian 10y ago
I don't get it either. I'm a happy Dad engineer but I have no idea what I'm doing and could use this kind of testimonials/advice too!
cbcowans 10y ago
The questions and answers here aren't necessarily specific to women. The idea of the series is just to ask women engineers questions and see what they say.
- mcv 10y ago
  But it seems rather stereotyping to start out with kids and relationships for a series about female engineers. Or do "Ask a male or non-gender specific engineer" series also start with those questions? I mean, they're important questions, but the stereotype seems rather blatant here.
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
  - emelski 10y ago
    This is the fourth post in the series, not the start. Previous posts: http://themacro.com/articles/2016/09/introducing-ask-a-female-engineer/ http://themacro.com/articles/2016/09/introducing-ask-a-femal... http://themacro.com/articles/2016/09/ask-a-female-engineer-2/ http://themacro.com/articles/2016/09/ask-a-female-engineer-2... http://themacro.com/articles/2016/10/ask-a-female-engineer-3/ http://themacro.com/articles/2016/10/ask-a-female-engineer-3...
  - kohanz 10y ago

dbg31415 10y ago

Quick question, what does being a female engineer have to do with the answers here? Aren't they the same answers for everyone? 1 Relationships - Don't shit where you eat. End of story. If you work with someone don't fuck them. Far as I'm concerned anyone who fucks a coworker is a retard who should be canned for having piss poor judgement. "But, as long as it's not in the command chain..." No, it's always an extremely risky shitty idea, and has no value for your company or team. It will cause drama. 2 Kids - I don't care about your personal life. Meaning I don't think you deserve special policies or treatment just because you opted to have offspring. Everyone should work from home when sick, if they do it so often that it has and impact on their ability to produce, it should be grounds for a demotion or termination. Anything can be planned around, don't fuck over your team because you have poor time management, or planning abilities. I don't care if you're a male or a female -- that sucks. So get a sitter, get a backup sitter if you have to, don't ever use your kids as an excuse. Book out time on your calendar and get your work done as needed. Past that, I don't care if you have a kid, dog, 18 transgender ponies... your personal life isn't any of my business.

simonsarris 10y ago
> Far as I'm concerned anyone who fucks a coworker is a retard who should be canned for having piss poor judgement. It worked out OK for Bill Gates, who together with Melinda went on to create the largest transparently operated private foundation in the world. I suspect for some people, working well together means just that, and can extend to other relationships. You call it shitting where you eat, they call it forming the world's best power couple. In more mundane terms, it works out OK, I suspect, for many of the couples who decide to found businesses together, from startups to bakeries.
- jandrese 10y ago
  It certainly can work, but it also can end very badly with messy lawsuits. In general, it is best to avoid relationships within the chain of command. Obviously that's not possible when you're in a tiny company and dating the CEO, but in general it is good advice.
10y ago

bettyx1138 10y ago

"ladies" is old-fashioned and patronizing. say "women" instead. :)

67726e 10y ago
What's patronizing about the word "ladies"?
- BinaryIdiot 10y ago
  So I'm curious as well but I know many female friends who prefer to be called a lady / ladies so I'm not sure you can necessarily win when you attempt to converse with someone and you have zero context about them. I think people need to be more forgiving with most labels when the conversation happens anonymously without context of that user's preference. Now if you referred to them as "bitches" that would be a problem but I feel like we can be forgiving for "ladies", even if a majority of women do not like it. Right? At least that's what I think.
  - projektir 10y ago
    I don't particularly care for the term "lady", but I would never consider it patronizing or an insult. I agree that people need to be more forgiving, this is just not worth the effort to worry about it.
- 2muchcoffeeman 10y ago
  Nothing. It is a term generally used out of respect or formality like gentleman or Lord. Though I guess there are usages where it is just a gendered pronoun. The only context I've seen where 'lady' might be offensive is when some men enter a room full of other men and addresses them like "hello ladies".
pmiller2 10y ago
I'll be sure to inform PyLadies post haste. ;)
jotux 10y ago

bettyx1138 10y ago

I've worked at places that allowed many of the flexibilities mentioned. I sometimes felt that it was more socially acceptable for men and women with kids to use the WFH and leave early flexibilities than it was for those of us who are child-free.

beachstartup 10y ago
yes, it's a double standard. usually the people who make the rules have kids also, so this is how it plays out.
- m_t 10y ago
  I've also heard that most of those rule making people were at some point children themselves. It's a vicious circle really.
dominotw 10y ago
It would be better if it people were encouraged to not reveal the reason why they want to WFH
oldmanjay 10y ago
People often "feel" all sorts of rules that aren't real, then modify their behavior based on these unreal rules they've perceived, then harshly judge others for not living in the exact same dreamworld. I'm endlessly amused by it.

mcv 10y ago

The first thing that strikes me is that the first two questions asked of a female engineer are about kids and relationships. Of course those things are relevant to some women (though hardly all), but they're just as relevant to men. I know tons of male engineers with kids (I'm one of them) who have to leave early to pick up kids from day care, or suddenly can't come in because their child is sick. Many work 4 days a week in order to have more time for their family.

nsavaaytrev 10y ago
I think you're missing the point of this series. I think the point is to get women in tech to answer questions about their experiences (as women). I don't think it's meant to be limited to them talking about experiences only relevant to females. But you're right that many of the questions could be asked of men too.
Trombone12 10y ago
This is the fourth instalment of the series, the first question answered was actually: "On a typical day, how conscious are you of being a female engineer and can you tell us about the ways in which you feel (or are made to feel) this way?"

logicallee 10y ago

[retracted]

deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
sctb 10y ago
We ask that you please don't do this because it sabotages the discussion thread. We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12809769 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12809769 and marked it off-topic.

Disruptive_Dave 10y ago

Amen. I've consistently asked people how it makes sense to (supposedly) combat sexism with....more sexism. It's ridiculous. Just treat people as the people they are (in other words, please also don't ignore physical differences in genders). Every time I see someone start another "femgineer" or "girl boss!!!" company I cringe at anyone who celebrates that as progress. /rant

snowwrestler 10y ago
Sexism is a power imbalance based on sex (i.e. gender). Just acknowledging gender is not sexism. A woman who volunteers her time to answer some random questions is not being subjected to sexism. And by the way, since it is a power imbalance based on sex (i.e gender), you can't combat it without acknowledging and discussing sex (i.e. gender). I keep saying (i.e. gender) so people don't think I'm talking about the fun activity that sometimes makes a baby.
- Disruptive_Dave 10y ago
  Actually, it's prejudice and discrimination based on gender. "Femgineering" and women's only clubs/sites/services are doing just that. It irks me that the same path that led us to today's problems is being walked again, just in a different direction. (Obviously this is a WAY more complex scenario than can be handled in HN comments, but that's my two cents.)
  - snowwrestler 10y ago
    There's no prejudice or discrimination at work if some women volunteer to answer questions from the Internet.
sctb 10y ago
We detached this flagged subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12808368 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12808368 and marked it off-topic.

rustynails 10y ago

Pick a criteria, any meaningful criteria. Now line a room full of people up in order of that criteria. What do you see? I see a mixed line of races, genders, heights, skin colours, etc. Why am I pointing this out? Because while this article sounds wise, it's not. It's also a shallow thought pattern of generalising. A woman's view is somehow different from a man's. Really? Someone who has cancer (as an example) might want to work from home (even IF they're male). The mindset of this article is baffling (especially when the article isn't pushing gender discrimination, unlike many similar articles). Nobody should be penalised for taking slabs of time off work. True! Just penalise the ones that don't take time off (ie. by ignoring those consistently available as providing no extra value), or better yet, put everyone on part time! In reality, a smart boss/business will promote someone who is there when needed! The author of this article started with a prejudiced premise (ie. sees the world as genders). Considering that starting point, the article was unusually inclusive for an article that thinks in genders. However, I don't really care about a person's gender. So, articles like this stand out as demonstrating shallow and flawed thinking. As I once said to my wife "why don't people ask about redheads in engineering?"

sfaf 10y ago
Do you have an ethical objection to surveying under-represented groups on general questions? To me this is no different than "ask a black engineer, ask college dropout engineer, ask an engineer working in a developing country, ask a house husband, ask an engineer who grew up in the projects, ask an engineer who didn't study cs, etc." The point is for me to get a perspective from a background that I don't have. To me that adds value.
- Trombone12 10y ago
  Wow, that your comment got downvotes is baffling! Well, not really. But it should be! I certainly agree with you, its really weird that people think its wrong to ask women for their opinion. Maybe they just had a really bad experience on a date when they asked what she wanted to eat? (badom-tsh!) Going along on that tangent, who here has a male spouse that has a really hard time deciding what to eat? (I know enough examples in the other direction, thank you for asking. You are of course welcome to come with examples outside the binay, the more diverse the merrier)

brhsiao 10y ago

Unrelated, but as a 21 year old (male!) who knows little about society, human psychology, etc., can I ask with sincerity what is probably a really dumb question? Why do companies/society need to accommodate people who have kids? Why are maternity/paternity leave a thing? How come we don't expect people to price the fact that having a kid is a lot of work that will inherently set their life back into their decision of whether to have one? Is it really so "evil" when one makes the assumption that someone with kids is on balance less dedicated, more tired, more preoccupied, etc. than someone without? Can't we rephrase that as, someone who has a matter in their life they need to spend hours a day on will have less time for other things? Is that discrimination?

snowwrestler 10y ago
Where do you see yourself in about 30 years? Would you like to have a healthy society, innovation in arts and sciences, a strong economy, a strong national defense, etc.? Well, the kids who are babies today will be providing that for you--even if you don't have kids yourself. That's one reason childrearing gets special treatment in policy. Another more practical reason is that quite a lot of people have kids, and so families make up a large block of votes in our democracy.
- brhsiao 10y ago
  I get that humans should have kids, and obviously it's terrible (and should be fixed) whenever kids are neglected. We should have (more, better) programs for this. But why does it fall on companies to create an "environment" that treats people with kids the same way when in fact their circumstances are different? During the YC/Thiel thing, I saw someone cite "I would be reluctant to start a startup with a woman who had small children, or was likely to have them soon", as an example of a morally outrageous statement. But surely people with small kids are more preoccupied?
  - tunah2 10y ago
    Because kids do better when their parents take care of them, and "programs" can't replace this. Companies have to help out because they're part of society. In exchange they get to do things like limit their liability and collectively enter into contracts.

knorker 10y ago

This entire article says that women cannot work as much or as well as men, because they instead choose to spend a significant amount of their life being parents. You only have 100% of your time. If this article is accurate, then why should I as an employer hire women? They will be worse employees than a man would, apparently. Yes, there is value to diversity of opinions and experiences, but this article tells me that the trade-off cannot possibly be worth it.

balls187 10y ago
The burden of parenthood doesn't always fall solely on mom. I rushed home from work early Tuesday because my son had been crying non-stop for 3 hours (he had stomach issues, which caused him to enter a negative feedback loop). My wife and I have a plan in place, she is 1st responder, solely because she commutes by car, and is 20 minutes away. However, she is out of town at a conference, so I am the primary parent on call. That is also to say nothing of what it's like to be a middle aged person and have to care for an elderly parent. Basically, life happens, and work needs to account for that. If you as an employer are lucky, you can be in a field that can easily replace Humans with Robots/Computers. As a boss myself, I let my team know, they can have as much time necessary to handle their personal lives, as long as they deliver.
- knorker 10y ago
  > The burden of parenthood doesn't always fall solely on mom. I know. I'm only saying that this is what the article says. This article appears to attempt to make employees cater to moms, but I'm saying it's failing catastrophically.
- knorker 10y ago
  (separate comment, because this is not related to genders) > Basically, life happens, and work needs to account for that. I'm not sure that it does need to do that. Let's say someone has three kids and is a single parent. This person cannot be the best at what they do. It's just not possible. That guy or gal who has to leave at 4pm sharp every day to pick up from child care and then needs to care for the children can not compete with someone who does not and has the same passion for work, and abilities. Who has read more books, who has gone to more conferences, networked, and actually coded, after 10 years of this. All else being equal? I think it's up to the state to encourage raising children if it wants, but let's not pretend that someone who's been away for years is as good as the same person who has not. Some countries legally mandate that parental leave MUST be counted as "work experience", with promotions and salary increases as if they were working. (e.g. Sweden, with its 400+ day parental leave) (don't counter with "someone really good and a parent is better than a mediocre one without children", since you'll find that I said nothing implying otherwise, because of course that's true)

sokoloff 10y ago

> That same CEO would go to my house and stay with my kids when we had emergency technical issues requiring all of the tech staff to stay late. Bravo for that CEO! Things like that engender crazy amounts of respect and loyalty.

Trombone12 10y ago

Honestly I upvote this simply because women get asked and can reply uninterrupted, I don't actually care all that much about what they say just that they have been given the space to say it (as none of these engineers are the one I married).

jeffrom 10y ago

If you agree that there has historically been a disparity between the genders and you agree that there is currently an gender disparity in the workplace, it is not much of jump to believe that elevating women could help to correct that problem. I see a lot of comments on posts like these claiming that it is sexist or just reproducing the problem to give women visibility or an advantage in the workplace. Usually these comments are supported by anecdotal evidence. I think these comments are supporting the status quo. Given the mountains of evidence showing gender disparity today in hiring, salary, etc, as well as the historical fact of women's position vs men over the last few thousand years, shouldn't we be leaning in the direction of trying things out?

Hondor 10y ago

I was expecting this to be a complaint that the only questions people ask female engineers are about kids and dating, instead of engineering. Who can tell which way public opinion will spin these days!

Trombone12 10y ago
This is the fourth instalment of the series, so these weren't the first question asked to the engineers. But yes, a lot of comments have been from people not seeing the reference to the earlier parts in the beginning of the post, or seen the earlier threads on HN, and reacting like you.
Trombone12 10y ago
This is the fourth instalment of the series, so these weren't the first question asked to the engineers. But yes, a lot of comments have been from people not seeing the reference to the earlier parts in the beginning of the post, or seen the earlier threads on HN, and reacting like you.