3 ms·
Sundar could have fired Damore without making an official statement. Or he could have made a statement that doesn't elaborate on the reasons for the firing, or
by danarmak 9y ago
Sundar could have fired Damore without making an official statement. Or he could have made a statement that doesn't elaborate on the reasons for the firing, or that says what you did - that he's being fired for causing bad PR.
Instead, Sundar found it necessary to lie in his official statement about what Damore had said. He defamed him by saying that his memo contained things that are contrary to what the memo actually says and that Damore himself would certainly denounce if asked. Because, presumably, Sundar felt it was preferable to appease a mob by acquiescing in their villification of a Google employee.
That is what is this particular post claims makes Sundar a bad CEO. I don't know if that's true - that is, whether it makes him an ineffective CEO, whether his actions were good for Google in the long run; that remains to be seen. But the author of this piece feels that it was a morally wrong action (and I agree).
- humanrebar 9y ago> Sundar found it necessary to lie in his official statement about what Damore had said It could be a lie? It seems more logical that it's a misunderstanding. Neither make Pichai look good, especially since he had no discussions with Damore (according to Damore) to clear up any misunderstandings.
- danarmak 9y agoIt's like the article says: either Sundar didn't take the time to read the memo himself (which would be stupid and dangerous), or he didn't understand it (which is another way of calling him stupid), or - as seems most likely - he knowingly misrepresented it.
- humanrebar 9y agoIt may be a knowing representation, though Hanlon's Razor would indicate some lack of rigor instead.
- danarmak 9y agoI find it unlikely that Hanlon's Razor should apply to a case of reading comprehension by a CEO of Google. But if it does, that's a different reason to want him to resign.