50 ms·
An Open Letter to the Uber Board and Investors
- mrgriscom 10y agoWow, lotta founders showing their true colors in this thread re: contempt for their investors.
- unethical_ban 10y agoTrue colors like wanting investors, people with skin in the game and the ear of the company, to voice concerns through standard channels? Could you provide some more detail to your condescension?
- mejari 10y agoWhy are you stating that they didn't follow the "standard channels" when the linked letter explicitly states that they had been doing exactly that for a long period of time? Are you calling them liars?
- dikdik 10y agoHasn't Uber shown repeatedly that their "standard channels" are broken and don't produce results?
- shirleman 10y agoThey did use standard channels. For years. And Uber execs kept being fuckwads about it. At some point, enough is enough. If you don't stand up against injustice, I don't want you within 8 million feet of a company I work for.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- spcelzrd 10y agoTravis Kalanick is a dumpster fire of mediocre privilege. You've elevated the most average person imaginable and now treat him like he's the only one who can steer this magical unicorn. Literally anyone plucked from the ranks of white collar management could do a less incompetent job. Unrelated: > Silicon Valley prides itself on pattern recognition Let's have less of this. Patterns are more likely figments of the imagination.
- dang 10y agoPlease don't post overheated rants to HN. It's bad for discussion quality even when there's a correct core to what you're saying. Actually, especially when there is.
- rokosbasilisk 10y agowhat you mean correct core ?
- 542458 10y agoPatent trolls are lousy, but going on HN and posting a long-winded rant about how they're literally software hitler and should be tortured and then executed does nobody a service. The core of my complaint (patent trolls hurt small innovators) is debatably valid, but the way I'm expressing it alienates those who disagree with me and makes those who would otherwise be my allies shut up in fear of being associated with my jerkishness.
- dang 10y agoI mean some important truth underlying the rant. I'm not implying that there was one here. The point is that even when there is, it makes the destructive effects of ranting worse. It discredits that truth for those who don't see it and excites mob responses from those who do.
- aerovistae 10y agoVery well put.
- ihsw 10y agoDiversity and inclusion are dog-whistles -- it automatically implies unconditional pandering to people of color and women. Frankly I find it offensive that we have stopped judging people based on the quality of their character rather than their skin color and gender. I would get behind this effort at reform but the progressive extremists need to get off their high horses and advocate for simple and straight-forward policies -- advocate for respect and intelligent hiring practices regardless of gender and race.
- smallgovt 10y agoI'm sure this will be an unpopular opinion since most of us agree with what Mitch is saying and rightfully want change, but as a founder, this sort of behavior from an investor seems to be a giant breach of trust. In early rounds, founders are looking for investors who will trust management to make decisions in the best interest of the company. EVEN if they don't agree with those decisions, it's expected that they'll be a team player and provide support in whatever way possible. I'm sure Mitch thinks what he's doing is in the best interest of the company (and it probabily is!). But, he surely doesn't have perfect information on what's going on (only management has a full picture).
- RodericDay 10y agoAs a citizen, I'm frequently told to "vote with my wallet". Therefore, I would hope that people with way bigger wallets than me would be held to the same standard.
- ethbro 10y ago"In early rounds, founders are looking for investors who will trust management..." And by "early rounds" you mean $2B, correct?
- powera 10y agoAs an investor, I'd never give money to a founder who exhibits this sort of attitude. Uber is facing a catastrophic crisis. This could kill the company, or at least cause massive attrition. If Uber isn't willing to take advice on how to get out of this terrible situation that it has created, it may well die. And in situations like this, I find it a general rule to never give management the "benefit of the doubt". Of course, I'm not trying to give you money, but I'd hope other founders don't learn from your behavior.
- WalterSear 10y ago>...or at least cause massive attrition. https://twitter.com/physicsNcoffee/status/834566962998960128 https://twitter.com/physicsNcoffee/status/834566962998960128 Blind app is anonymous, so obviously this is yet to be substantiated. If this attrition is actually taking place, we'll know very shortly.
- finkin1 10y agoMaybe the claims made by Susan Fowler are accurate and honest, maybe they aren't. This is why there are investigations. We want the truth, not a bunch of opinions which may or may not be credible. The author seems to be claiming that Eric Holder is not suited to run such an investigation. Seems reasonable to me. Uber should find someone else. My problem with the author is that it's pretty apparent conclusions are being drawn without actual evidence.
- finkin1 10y agoAnyone care to comment on why they downvoted? I'm genuinely open to the fact that I could be missing information here...
- danpalmer 10y agoIs the blog post by Susan not evidence? It certainly seems reasonable enough evidence to suggest what the investor is suggesting, which is that a more thorough and unbiased investigation should be carried out.
- finkin1 10y agoI would consider Susan's blog post a form of evidence, but just about the lowest form there is. I don't know Susan personally, so I can't speak to her character. Maybe she's a pathological liar or maybe she's the most honest and genuine person I'll ever meet. The point is that I don't know, and unless you know her personally neither do you. This is not a controversial fact I hope we all agree. Forms of evidence I'd be interested in seeing: slack chats, emails, internal HR files, etc. that should all in theory come to light if there was an independent investigation. If there is a systematic covering up of sexual harassment at Uber there will be hard evidence to support it, right? What actual evidence (other than Susan's blog post) do we have that leads to a rational and unbiased conclusion that Uber is intentionally covering up sexual harassment?
- the_common_man 10y ago
- kisstheblade 10y agoSo who is this mitch and has he invested in uber? If so, why doesn't he pull his investment unless they do something about this that he can agree with (like fire the CEO, the buck stops at him, right?)? Instead of just you know counting his money (he's probably rich?) and writing on blogs. I mean nothing will happen to uber, you just wait and see. People want their cheap rides. People are in such a shitty place that they need to work for uber. Investors want their money back x10. Etc. Nobody cares about some ranting in "teh social media", what a joke.
- dsr_ 10y agoI'm pretty sure wikipedia will tell you who Mitch Kapor is. Let's see... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitch_Kapor https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitch_Kapor He seems to be involved in doing pretty good things. One of those, right now, is exerting some pressure on Uber to stop acting like slimebags.
- zymhan 10y agoWow, he cofounded the EFF.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- TillE 10y agoI confess I'm not intimately familiar with the details of how VCs typically work, but I'm pretty sure you usually can't just "pull" your investment.
- danpalmer 10y agoCorrect, you can't. You have shares and typically need board approval to sell those. Even if the board might give you approval, the admin required to make that happen and get it in writing means it's unlikely to happen in practice.
- kdamken 10y ago
- flyingramen 10y agoWhat would an ideal way forward be for Uber? Recent incidents combined with a tainted past make public trust in Uber not the best. Lot of people have suggest these problems stem from the culture. Culture of companies and people is similar to the culture of, say, bread. The starter really matters and sets the tone. I'd be interested in hearing from people who have seen a drastic change in culture at a big place or better yet, have been behind that change. The other idea is it could just be a few rotten apples giving everyone a bad name. I don't know the answer.
- unityByFreedom 10y agoNew leadership is one option. Depends if investors feel a change would improve things or not
- JumpCrisscross 10y agoAllow employees to sue as a class for cases of sexual harassment. Currently, Uber's employees are bound to confidential, bilateral and binding arbitration. Next, deputise an ombudsman to whom every employee has a confidential and direct line. This ombudsman reports directly to the CEO and the Board. They should have a large amount of authority surrounding recommending dismissal of any employee to the CEO; whenever a recommendation is made, it should be copied to the Board. In return, the ombudsman should carry a significant amount of personal liability in connection with sexual harassment at the company. This is how compliance works at many financial firms, and it's very effective. Compliance officers are deputized by the U.S. Treasury for anti-money laundering purposes. This makes them personally responsible if something goes wrong. It shows.
- Steko 10y ago> What would an ideal way forward be for Uber? How about firing sexual harassers? And any HR staff that systematically lied to cover it up. And the people who gave them those orders. And not taking forever to do it.
- Arizhel 10y agoNot just that: cancel any stock options or other perks they have too.
- anjc 10y agoAn investor issues veiled threats while acting as if they're owners or management. Who cares if you're "available to make suggestions", and what makes you think you're entitled to work behind the scenes to change company culture?
- jeffjose 10y agoInvestors, by very definition, are (part) owners. And management is put in place by the board, that owners/investors control
- anjc 10y agoYeah I understand, but having a stake in a company doesn't give you the right to act as an advisor to the board or management. You're aren't a worker or a consultant and you're not on the board. If they have an issue with the board then then there are manoeuvres that they can take.
- CydeWeys 10y agoThis, and this is one such maneuver. Hell, it's just an open letter! I don't understand all the fuss over it. There are much more damaging maneuvers that are available, like lawsuits.
- anjc 10y agoI don't think it's that big of a deal. I do think that it's more likely to have a negative than positive effect, in that it risks the proliferation of the negative press surrounding the company at the moment.
- stale2002 10y agoYes you do have that right. Investors literally own the company. People who literally own the company are of course expected to give their opinion on matters concerning the company that they own.
- powera 10y agoThis is a corporate crisis for Uber. Right now, Uber is very clearly following the playbook that historically leads to dead companies. It needs a truly credible response, not one that happens to use some celebrities they have on hand.
- 542458 10y ago> following the playbook that historically leads to dead companies I agree that Uber is handling this poorly, but can you elaborate?
- Arizhel 10y agoYeah, I agree. Examples! If this is true, there's got to be some really interesting stories here.
- artursapek 10y agoNest comes to mind. I remember hearing horror stories about management there treating employees like total crap.
- macspoofing 10y agoNest had a nice exit.
- artursapek 10y agoThe abuse continued after the exit.
- shirleman 10y agoI'd point to Theranos and the secrecy they employed. They were acting poorly at a business model level but their culture was also supposedly not great
- macspoofing 10y ago
- mevile 10y agoI may be in the minority on this point of view, but maybe it's in the interest of the board and investors to wait on the results of the independent investigation before commenting on the contents of the accusation. They could though make a statement in support of the investigation and employees however.
- ebbv 10y agoThat's the whole point of the letter, the investigation being conducted is a bunch of insiders with vested interest in protecting Uber. It's baloney.
- cjbprime 10y agoDid you read the letter? One of the main points in it is that the investigation is not being conducted independently.
- mi100hael 10y agoThe top highlight from the article... > We are disappointed to see that Uber has selected a team of insiders to investigate its destructive culture and make recommendations for change. To us, this decision is yet another example of Uber’s continued unwillingness to be open, transparent, and direct.
- st3v3r 10y agoI'm going to guess that the board and investors know more than we do, and that they know what such an investigation would bring.
- rdl 10y agoI would be exceedingly reluctant to work with an investor who writes an "open letter" to a company in a situation like this, and particularly when that letter calls out the CEO in a pretty gratuitous way ("and we have both been contacted by senior leaders at Uber (though notably not by Travis, the CEO)"). You're supposed to be able to be open with investors and other advisors, so this is a deep breech of trust in a non-public company. I can't see taking advice from and sharing confidential or sensitive information with someone who has done that to you in the past. (The sad part is I agree Uber has a problem and needs to change; Susan Fowler's blog post was remarkable.)
- jackmott 10y agoAnd I would be reluctant to work with someone who wouldn't write that letter.
- rdl 10y agoI think they should do a lot more than the letter, but not publicly. (And to be fair, it sounds like they did, until recently.) The ultimate goal here should be "make Uber a better company -- for employees, customers, and society", not "burnish the Kapor's SJW credentials". The public letter accomplishes the latter, not the former.
- tumblen 10y agoFrom reading the letter it sounds like they've been trying to do more for years in private, without success.
- mejari 10y agoWhat is your reasoning to state so unequivocally that the goal of this is not to make Uber a better company? Do you agree at least in theory that there is some amount of time of attempting to influence a company in private without success after which it is appropriate to go public? If not why not, and if so why are you so certain that that time requirement has not been met yet in this case?
- 10y ago
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- ffef 10y agoAs a male in my early twenties, working as a developer I've come to realize that it's just better to not even try to engage in small talk and/or non-work related conversations with female co-workers. I keep it dry and basic. Just last week I had a buddy who was on the phone with his brother and blurted "Bro, she was amazing, then I left her house haha" he was fired the next day because a co-worker overheard his conversation and felt uncomfortable.
- fullshark 10y agoHow is this relevant? Are you implying that the original blogpost indicated an overreaction on Susan Fowler's part?
- aerovistae 10y agoI don't even know what to say to this. If your interactions with females are so problematic that you're now afraid to talk to them for fear of repercussions, I seriously doubt "women" are the problem here, which is what you seem to be implying.
- unethical_ban 10y agoIt's off topic. It is also concerning that (without more detail) a singular remark about a social event off-hours would get someone fired.
- danpalmer 10y agoI suspect that, for someone who uses that sort of language to talk about women even in private, it likely wasn't a first or only offence.
- unethical_ban 10y agoUsing 'bro' non ironically might be more of a key off than describing an experience with a woman as 'amazing'.
- 10y ago
- petergatsby 10y agoFowler's post shed light on Uber's serious internal problems -- no doubt. But going public with a post like this erodes founder-investor trust. It's across the line. Publicly condemning the internal culture the post depicted would be reasonable, even helpful, but trying to "expose" Uber's leadership for showmanship and posturing ('hiring' Holder who was ostensibly involved long-before the Fowler post) to mitigate the pr fallout is counterproductive. Don't kick your founder when he's down.
- haydenlee 10y ago> Don't kick your founder when he's down. There should also be a counter rule: > Don't stick by your founders if they are creating horrible environments, such as Uber's, and are unwilling to make up for their mistakes. If more investors had this sort of backbone founders might feel more accountability and not let these situations happen in the first place. This would be at the expense of bad founders losing trust with their investors? Great. The good founders will be glad that the Kapor's stood up for what is right, and know that they will never be placed in the same situation themselves because they trust their own moral compasses.
- petergatsby 10y agoIn theory perhaps. But anyone who's been paying attention knows, depressingly, that the stories coming out of Uber aren't new or unique. The gross culture depicted in these kinds of posts maps pretty-much 1:1 with the wider culture of the Valley.
- oxryly1 10y agoMaybe I'm not parsing your comments correctly, but it seems like you're claiming that Uber has a real cultural problem and that problem is endemic to tech in the Valley (if not in general) -- but you're arguing that confronting those in positions of power or leadership is unfair to them?
- ebbv 10y agoBravo to Mitch and Freada Kapor for going out on a limb like this. Uber has been toxic for years and everyone has remained silent. Every PR crisis has been swept under the rug and nothing has apparently changed. Hopefully an investor speaking up in this way will finally prompt the board to treat the problems in Uber seriously and have a truly independent investigation done.
- lightyagamai 10y agoI'm a former uber s/w engineer. I've been with uber for nearly 2 yrs and most of the article content are valid. Employees voicing out genuine concerns will be met with severe rebuke. This will be swept under the carpet sooner or latter. For customers, the quality and experience of their ride is the only thing that will matter. This won't even affect their business.
- shados 10y agowhile Uber's culture problems are legendary...I've seen this type of complain at every single company I worked for (which is almost 2 dozens at this point), including when it was not true at all and people were just whiny that their idea for office decoration did not get accepted. So we're starting to suffer from a "boy who cried wolf" syndrome, where when the complain is real, no one cares. That's a big problem.
- Balgair 10y agoI mean, it may just be you and/or your close associates. Saying the industry is suffering from false reporting is kinda a stretch, though you do bring up a good point about sites like GlassDoor and all: take everything with not just a grain of salt, but a boulder.
- ryanisnan 10y ago> So we're starting to suffer from a "boy who cried wolf" syndrome It seems like you're somewhat sympathizing with Uber HR's decisions regarding this individual on account of the "boy cried wolf" syndrome. This seems like hardly that at all. The events at Uber read like a systemic failure to deal with problems, and an extreme indifference to sexual harassment for the benefit of retaining "good" engineers. Fuck this mentality. edit: Forgive me if I am misunderstanding your comments.
- harlanlewis 10y agoNot the poster, but I think he means that Uber is the very wolf we've become too desensitized to recognize. But I have not seen the endemic spiteful complaints he has. My impression is this place is full of wolves that are seldom called out.
- petergatsby 10y ago"As investors, we certainly want to see Uber succeed, but success must be measured in more than just returns." -- Sure, but Uber is already a mission-driven company whose success is inversely proportional to horrible things like DUI deaths -- statements like these impede their progress
- qsymmachus 10y agoPoe's law applies
- aetherson 10y agoIf only there was some way to provide a taxi service while simultaneously not sexually harassing site-reliability engineers. Tragically, Uber cars burn Susan Fowler's tears instead of gas.
- jkaptur 10y agoSure, but it's hard to think of much that would hurt "the mission" more than the harassment that's been alleged (and corroborated). Properly investigating that, removing those involved at any level, and ensuring a culture where it never happens again are a critical part of "the mission", kind of like putting out a fire in the office.
- jonthepirate 10y agoAs an investor in Lyft, I'm sorry to say that I hope Uber doesn't change anything they're doing. The Uber management is the best thing that's happened to my personal finances in a while.
- hyperbovine 10y agoYou hope they continue to sexually harass their female employees?
- cal5k 10y agoI don't think he meant that literally, he meant that he hopes they continue to exhibit gross managerial incompetence.
- bogomipz 10y agoBut that very gross managerial incompetence might also be doing harm to people.
- shirleman 10y agoLiteral interpretation. I would give him/her the benefit of the doubt and say meaning they keep flubbing like a bunch of fuckwads every chance they get
- hrxn 10y agoIs that what actually happened? So far I've only seen unsubstantiated allegations, nothing more.
- 31reasons 10y agoSo looks like if you were investor in Uber, you are one of those who would stay quiet!
- plink 10y agoI sympathize, but as neither an investor in Lyft nor Uber. I personally can't wait for Uber to go public and soon before their fall. I perceive it as the greatest opportunity to short not seen since the housing crisis. Think of it: a $70B valuation based on no assets but data. Such blindness on the part of the tech-venture community is intoxicating to consider.
- gydfi 10y agoIsn't it weird that this totally unrelated problem came to light just weeks after a group of people started an anti-Uber campaign for Uber's failure to be quite as anti-Trump as they'd like? What are the underlying politics here? How does it affect the skepticism we should exhibit when evaluating random anecdotes?
- geofft 10y agoIt's weird, but not in the way you think. What's weird is that people seem to be reading Susan Fowler's story as somehow unique to Uber. Her story happens in so many tech companies, to so many people. I saw someone retweet her post well before the media picked it up, and I retweeted it because it was yet another good writeup of the problems in the tech industry. I'm baffled that the narrative is somehow that this is a uniquely bad problem, specific to Uber. From the starting position that hers is one of many stories like this, no, it's not particularly weird that this one came to light after the anti-Uber campaign. It happened to line up well with the tech and media industries recently hating Uber because of politics, and so it played to people's biases. And the particular narrative that Uber is the one bad company in a good industry definitely played to people's biases. There are lots of stories like this (which is part of why I think this story is particularly believable: it's not an extraordinary claim by any stretch, and therefore does not require extraordinary evidence), but you've heard of very few of them. Be skeptical of the implicit claim that Uber is awful in ways that the rest of the industry isn't.
- gydfi 10y agoThat is the way I think... not that the story is necessarily bullshit (though like most conflict stories of which we've only heard one side it may have other factors) but that it's a fairly normal story from a rightfully disgruntled employee (there's always rightfully disgruntled employees) which has been elevated to the level of some unique crime against humanity.
- macspoofing 10y agoIs the software tech industry better or worse than all the other industries?
- tyre 10y agoThis is a great example of why you should make sure that your goals align with those of your investors. Kapor Capital has a strong focus on social impact companies that benefit the disadvantaged.[1] Travis is a phenomenal salesman and fundraiser. Travis convinced Kapor that, amongst other things, Uber was a platform for democratizing transportation, citing things like racism amongst taxi cabs to spin Uber as social good. So now you have a company that isn't actually what it pitched itself to be. For many investors, hyper-growth and skyrocketing valuation will wipe out other concerns around culture, impact, etc. The Kapors are showing (awesomely, in my personal opinion) that they are serious about their social mission. They're doing what they can to influence a portfolio company to live up to their expectations. Travis probably doesn't like that—it sucks to be called out!—but that's why you take investment based on aligned interests and not just awesome salesmanship. [1]: http://www.kaporcapital.com/who-we-are/ http://www.kaporcapital.com/who-we-are/
- yummyfajitas 10y agoTravis is a phenomenal salesman and fundraiser. Travis convinced Kapor that, amongst other things, Uber was a platform for democratizing transportation, citing things like racism amongst taxi cabs to spin Uber as social good. So now you have a company that isn't actually what it pitched itself to be. But that's not true. Uber is still a platform for democratizing transportation. It has more or less completely fixed the issue of racism in taxi cabs (or auto rickshaws), which was previously a daily experience for me. In Maharashtra they've literally made an enemy of Shiv Sena, racist/nationalist political party, because they are undercutting the Marathi autowales. It's also improving women's safety worldwide, which is a major issue outside the west. Literally days after an Uber driver raped a passenger in Delhi, my girlfriend at the time still insisted on taking a radio taxi home (wasn't Uber, which was shut down for a little bit) because she felt safer than in an auto rickshaw or taxi. Uber is working - fairly successfully - to partially fix the issue of cronyism in governments around the world. They've taken private battles public and shown the world exactly how much people like Bill DeBlasio hurt the public. This would all be a huge net gain for the world even if every >$150k/year engineer at Uber was horribly mistreated/marginalized/had their butt patted before shifting to another $150k/year engineering job. The Kapors are not calling out Uber based on a utilitarian calculation. Uber is still exactly the force of good they promised to be, and their goals align just fine with the stated goals of the Kapors. It's just that their personality doesn't appeal to the zeitgeist, and it looks like that matters more to the Kapors than the actual good they do.
- rdiddly 10y agoGreat sentiment, but I don't suppose anyone had the brilliant idea of actually divesting their holdings in Uber, rather than just talk-talk-talking? Wanting them to change, and being in a positon to profit from the status quo, are kind of mutually-contradicting are they not? Looking for any investor with enough integrity and conviction to send a stronger message... I know, dream on, plus who would buy anyone out at this ridiculous level of overvaluation?
- swyman 10y agoDivesting would actually be the more direct form of profiting from the status quo. Lock in the gains that the status quo created for you before the culture becomes so toxic the company folds. Keeping your holdings and releasing this letter is actually the bravest thing you could do as an investor.
- uncrnhypcrt 10y agothe current uber hating seems like hive mind. without a doubt, the stories coming out of uber are not good. but i work at a unicorn and can unequivocally state that things are not vastly different here -- few to no female devs (and other specific roles too), little diversity, plenty of sexism, lots of politics, and huuuge assholes abound. if any of our stories happened at uber, it would be front page news. and my guess there is plenty of this around the industry. these firms get away with bad management by turning it around on employees... "if you see a problem, find a solution and fix it". this cuts both ways... no one blocks you from doing what you think is important (which is great), but equally no one steps in to play the role of mgmt when it matters (which sucks). in uber's case, the negative side to this culture is more on view than anywhere else. uber may be amongst the worst of the tech companies when it comes to this, but i certainly don't think they are an outlier.
- the_common_man 10y agoDoes anyone know why Susan chose to "blog" instead of filing a law suit?
- macspoofing 10y agoMaybe she's pissed but doesn't want to sue? Lawsuits are mentally and emotionally (and financially) draining.
- raarts 10y agoAs I understand Uber makes all employees sign an arbitration clause to prevent lawsuits.
- st3v3r 10y agoThis has been addressed in just about every discussion of her article.
- erikb 10y agoIn a lawsuit you fight alone and either give or get money in the end. A convincing public message can change the situation, sometimes.
- lglegl 10y agoCould SJWs be any more insufferably self-important? Uber's mission is to eat away at the non-existant margins of cab companies. I'll lose sleep over rape, breast cancer, FGM. That Uber isn't a fun place for girls to work - who cares?
- happy-go-lucky 10y ago> success must be measured in more than just returns.
- throwaway991999 10y agoMade a throwaway name because I have an unpopular opinion. We've likely read Susan Fowler's blog post. If true, it's awful behavior on the part of HR and management at Uber, and action should be taken. But that's the thing: a blog post does not establish truth. We've heard from only one side of the story. No one ever asks about the other side, or about whether we are being misled. We only talk about the bravery of the author and condemn the other side. I think the saddest part of our collective behavior is how quickly we come with pitchforks to a witch trial. We must remember that justice is not decided on Twitter, or on blogs. Justice is not decided by the voice of the accuser. Did you see evidence besides Susan Flower's putting phrases in quotation marks? She mentions screenshots of improper behavior but provides none. What if tomorrow new evidence comes out that this whole thing was exaggerated or flat out wrong. How would it feel, to being so easily manipulated into drawing a conclusion, into retweeting a fiction, into writing an open letter?
- grzm 10y agoNo one ever asks about the other side, or about whether we are being misled. That's just not true. There are numerous comments on HN that reflect exactly this sentiment, as well as every other point in your comment.
- throwaway991999 10y agoThe other side is not Uber, it's the accused.
- strathmeyer 10y agoNo, this was a story about Uber, try to keep up.
- grzm 10y agoCan you please elaborate? Your initial comment makes the point that no one is questioning Susan Fowler's allegations, that it's only one side, that her "blog post does not establish truth." That's the point that many other comments have made, whether it be about what happened at Uber, or more generally about whether the allegations are true at all. At this point, the accused (or Uber, for that matter) is perfectly free to make some announcement if they so choose. I wouldn't expect them to—nor fault them—as it wouldn't make any sense, politically or legally, to do so at this point, at least until the conclusion of any investigation.
- socrates1998 10y agoIt's going to be interesting to me to see how this all affects Uber's bottom line. If they keep scaring away engineers and getting bad publicity, will be scare away customers too? Or will the trail of engineers eventually catch up with the quality of the experience?
- slfnflctd 10y agoI'm quite sure it's already scared away customers. I'm one of them. I have 'missed' a number of opportunities over the years because I was unwilling to implicitly endorse unethical behavior (instead of quietly continuing to do business with entities I believe to be bad actors, I cut them out, because there are more important things than convenience and money). I don't plan to change this pattern, and I know I'm not the only one. The real question is what percentage of potential future customers Uber is losing. If people like me are a tiny minority, this may not affect their bottom line at all... which I would find very sad.
- matz1 10y agoIn reality how much people really care about the sexual harassment care?
- erikb 10y agoYeah, it may be more of a society problem than a corp problem.
- princetontiger 10y agoSilicon Valley for the past five years has been afflicted by Wall Street ethics. I've seen this first hand at a few SV companies. As a male, I've actually faced reverse harassment. Never worked at Uber, but I'm speaking of much larger SV companies. HR is useless. Silicon Valley is no different than any other place in the World. Just because people think they are "changing" the world doesn't mean ethics need to be on the line. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/11765609/Start-up-culture-is-corrupting-our-youth-and-killing-real-entrepreneurship.html http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/11765609/Start-up-cult...
- angry-hacker 10y agoI'm very confused, do people really believe companies in SV are more ethical or the social issues they support are because they believe in it, not just pr and marketing? And people here say advertising doesn't work.
- mst 10y ago> reverse harassment I am genuinely confused as to what you're trying to refer to with this term.
- derptron 10y agoPretty sure you know what he means and would instead just like to educate him on why "reverse harassment" isn't a thing. Right?
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- nurettin 10y agoIF lyft is behind all this, I'm impressed.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- zizzles 10y ago> So apparently the problem is not fully solved. You are completely right. The problem of poor, dirty, violent, urban-youth infested communities is not fully solved.
- dang 10y agoWe've banned this account. It's not ok to use HN primarily for political and ideological battle. We detached this comment from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13720963 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13720963 and marked it off-topic.
- erikb 10y agoWhat do people here think about Susan's way of doing things? While I think most of her behaviour is valid and I'm impressed by her professionalism, I think she starts too fast to report people, which costs her political power to achieve her goals and makes people in HR more pissed off than necessary. E.g., being hit on by colleagues is a common thing that happens to women. But some can deescalate it without much problems. She didn't even try to deescalate it, just report it and be done with it. It's a minor thing compared to all that which happened to her and I'm mostly thinking about it in terms of own career strategy.
- ndh2 10y ago"Being hit on by colleagues" and being asked for sex by your direct superior are two vastly different things. Pretty sure what you're doing is called victim blaming.
- tomp 10y agoI don't what what she was really doing, but from her blog post, it didn't seem like she was "hit on by colleagues". In general, while I think it would be beneficial for companies to employ only asexual (and otherwise perfectly rational) people, realistically employees are going to fall in love, and there's nothing wrong with that. So if she had been politely propositioned by a coworker to go on a date, in a way that would allow both of them to save face (usually, this is done by making the request ambiguous, "I only meant as friends"), then I'd agree that reporting that to HR would be unnecessary and inappropriate. But I don't think that her boss essentially emailing her "I can't get all the sex that I want" on her first day of work quite falls under the above scenario. While there's nothing wrong with no-strings-attached sex between fully-informed partners, I do think that employees should avoid that - you can't really help falling in love with someone, but please "keep it in your pants" (and the equivalent for women) at your workplace. In addition, if there's something wrong and you need to be mindful of your "political power" before reporting it, then there's much more wrong.
- dejawu 10y agoNo, because being propositioned for sex with a manager is absolutely out of line no matter when it happened. If anything, I think she was too patient with management and gave them way too many chances to get it remotely right because she seemed to really like the work she was doing.
- mfringel 10y agoI've said it before and I'll say it again: Uber has started a revolution. I do not require them to survive it.
- webXL 10y agoWhile those actions (and inaction) at Uber are despicable, part of me thinks that this was inevitable. In order to break up an entrenched, crony industry like ride hailing, you end up taking on some of their characteristics. Getting a female cabbie is incredibly rare in big cities[1], and associating with male drivers all the time is bound to produce some chauvinistic behaviors. I'm not excusing the behavior, but I think this definitely rubbed off on them. It's an ends justify the means mentality, and it might not have been necessary under a different power structure. I suppose there's a chance that Lyft could have done it right, but who knows how they would have handled the other PR battles. Hopefully a new crop of managers at Uber, eventually dealing with a much more diverse group of drivers, one that includes machines, will be much less chauvinistic. [1]: https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2014/08/how-uber-helps-women-break-into-the-taxi-industry/376127/ https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2014/08/how-ube...