4 ms·

>Sources said they had come to believe that Palihapitiya was no longer putting the firm first in his life This guy's bad behavior aside, that's a ridiculous ba

by imh 8y ago

>Sources said they had come to believe that Palihapitiya was no longer putting the firm first in his life This guy's bad behavior aside, that's a ridiculous bar to hold someone to. Sounds like he hardly cared at all.

fastball 8y ago
It's a ridiculous bar for many jobs. But "head of a billion dollar VC firm" is not really a position that allows for much work-life balance.
- ryandrake 8y ago
  > But "head of a billion dollar VC firm" is not really a position that allows for much work-life balance. Maybe playing devil's advocate a little, but why not? I admittedly don't know what a "head of a billion dollar VC firm" does all day, but what critical business actually won't get done because he takes 2 hours to go to his kid's little league game?
  - EpicEng 8y ago
    >what critical business actually won't get done because he takes 2 hours to go to his kid's little league game? Who said that was the issue? I imagine it was a pattern, not a one off life event.
  - huac 8y ago
    jetting with his new girlfriend to Italy for weeks at a time != taking 2 hours to go to his kid's little league game
EpicEng 8y ago
>that's a ridiculous bar to hold someone to "The bar" moves around depending on position. Sure, it's ridiculous to expect a secretary to put the company above all else, but the CEO? A high ranking government official? The head of a high profile medical department? Not so ridiculous at all.
- imh 8y ago
  Really? I can't think of how it's good for society to ask anyone outside public service not to put their job ahead of (for example) their family. I don't see why the CEO of WidgetCo should put widgets "first in their life." I might have even respected Obama saying "Joe's in charge today, I need to take care of some family stuff." I think that a position needing total dedication of a person is an indicator that the position doesn't have enough support.
  - Noumenon72 8y ago
    Do you have an extraneous not in your first sentence? Didn't you mean to say "It's not good for society to ask anyone to put their job first"? It is <i>amazingly</i> good for society when people put their jobs first. That's how you get people sacrificing their lives as police officers, their twenties as doctors, their privacy as President, their chance to have kids as mathematicians. It's not great for the people, and we should feel bad for tricking them into such an unfair distribution of society's costs.
    - imh 8y ago
      Yup. That "not" was a typo from before I rearranged that sentence. I spotted it too late to edit :-\ You're right that it's good for some parts of society when other parts make sacrifices. But those people are part of society too, and it's bad for them. I personally would rather live in a society where everyone works to live, not lives to work.
- village-idiot 8y ago
  It’s unclear if putting the company ahead of all else is good for the company too. It’s clearly bad for the individual.

by imh 8y ago

fastball 8y ago

It's a ridiculous bar for many jobs. But "head of a billion dollar VC firm" is not really a position that allows for much work-life balance.

ryandrake 8y ago
> But "head of a billion dollar VC firm" is not really a position that allows for much work-life balance. Maybe playing devil's advocate a little, but why not? I admittedly don't know what a "head of a billion dollar VC firm" does all day, but what critical business actually won't get done because he takes 2 hours to go to his kid's little league game?
- EpicEng 8y ago
  >what critical business actually won't get done because he takes 2 hours to go to his kid's little league game? Who said that was the issue? I imagine it was a pattern, not a one off life event.
- huac 8y ago
  jetting with his new girlfriend to Italy for weeks at a time != taking 2 hours to go to his kid's little league game

EpicEng 8y ago

>that's a ridiculous bar to hold someone to "The bar" moves around depending on position. Sure, it's ridiculous to expect a secretary to put the company above all else, but the CEO? A high ranking government official? The head of a high profile medical department? Not so ridiculous at all.

imh 8y ago
Really? I can't think of how it's good for society to ask anyone outside public service not to put their job ahead of (for example) their family. I don't see why the CEO of WidgetCo should put widgets "first in their life." I might have even respected Obama saying "Joe's in charge today, I need to take care of some family stuff." I think that a position needing total dedication of a person is an indicator that the position doesn't have enough support.
- Noumenon72 8y ago
  Do you have an extraneous not in your first sentence? Didn't you mean to say "It's not good for society to ask anyone to put their job first"? It is <i>amazingly</i> good for society when people put their jobs first. That's how you get people sacrificing their lives as police officers, their twenties as doctors, their privacy as President, their chance to have kids as mathematicians. It's not great for the people, and we should feel bad for tricking them into such an unfair distribution of society's costs.
  - imh 8y ago
    Yup. That "not" was a typo from before I rearranged that sentence. I spotted it too late to edit :-\ You're right that it's good for some parts of society when other parts make sacrifices. But those people are part of society too, and it's bad for them. I personally would rather live in a society where everyone works to live, not lives to work.
village-idiot 8y ago
It’s unclear if putting the company ahead of all else is good for the company too. It’s clearly bad for the individual.