5 ms·

“if he felt like Facebook was bending things the wrong way he'd say so” I wish that were true, but this is a rather naive perspective. Facebook has a well doc

“if he felt like Facebook was bending things the wrong way he'd say so” I wish that were true, but this is a rather naive perspective. Facebook has a well documented history of requiring outgoing employees to sign non-disparagement clauses. For someone as high up as Chief Product Officer you’d better believe that they would have Chris sign something expressly forbidding any overt criticism of the company. Any severance package which in this case is worth millions or tens of millions would be contingent on signing. I’m actually surprised he was able to say as much as he did.

kjar 8y ago
A non-disparagement clause is so fucking bonkers. I read these things and would never sign something like that. It’s a blatant corporate attack on your freedom of speech and absolutely insulting as a human. You pay me. You do not control me!
- avinium 8y ago
  You're not wrong. But ethics can become a lot more flexible when someone's dangling a few million in stock options in front of your face.
  - j-c-hewitt 8y ago
    Flip it around. If you are an employee partly compensated in stock, is it fair for a multi-billionaire who was one of your former bosses to flippantly trash talk the company in public after he cashes out, potentially damaging the value of your stock...? Wouldn't you want your employer to put some controls into place to prevent that kind of pointless harm to you? You can still talk about literally anything else if you sign a non-disparagement clause or an NDA.
    - Jach 8y ago
      > You can still talk about literally anything else if you sign a non-disparagement clause or an NDA. Why does this matter? It reminds me of the joke about how in America we value free speech so much that we can badmouth our leaders in public, but so what, in Soviet Russia they can badmouth the American leaders in public too. The question of how free your speech is, is determined by what you can't say, or can't get away with saying, without paying some hefty consequence (a punch, a fine, losing your job, imprisonment, forfeiting RSUs...).
      - leetcrew 8y ago
        think about it another way: it's blackmail against your employer that is actually initiated by the employer itself. you don't even have to make any threats and it's not illegal!
  - zimablue 8y ago
    Maybe the answer is just to make them illegal.
- Jach 8y ago
  > You pay me. You do not control me! That's why these things come with payment -- or for NDAs, a threat to make you pay them.
  - congressonndas 8y ago
    Check out what Ted Lieu, Representative from the LA area, had to say about NDAs: https://twitter.com/tedlieu/status/1105961668029358086 https://twitter.com/tedlieu/status/1105961668029358086 > @tedlieu I am authorized to make the following statement: If you feel silenced by an NDA and need help from a Congressional committee, please contact, or have your attorney contact, the House Judiciary Committee. ——- For topics of societal and national concern, House subpoenas could be a good way to force disclosure — of things companies are trying to hide, via paying off employees in exchange for NDAs.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- lawnchair_larry 8y ago
  If you got paid what he is getting paid to keep your mouth shut, I think you would.
  - clairity 8y ago
    doubtful. he's already got f-u money. a couple million more doesn't matter. what's probably more likely is that his net worth is highly correlated with facebook's, and disparagement could materially affect that.
    - creato 8y ago
      Maybe he simply isn't that confident in that opinion to state it so bluntly. I agree with the "reading between the lines" interpretation that this guy probably thinks facebook is a bad thing. But, thinking that, and coming out strongly with that position while holding such an influential position are two very different things. If I had such influence I'd certainly be hesitant to just go all guns blazing, and I'm someone that strongly believes social media (primarily facebook) is a serious threat to civilized society.
- mbesto 8y ago
  > I read these things and would never sign something like that. Ya, everyone does until they look at their bank account.
keepper 8y ago
"Facebook has a well documented history of requiring outgoing employees to sign non-disparagement clauses." You're basically lying here. They don't. Actually, the last few high profile departures were pretty disparaging. Think Brian Acton's comments[1], as well as Palmer lucky[2]. You obviously are overplaying your knowledge of Facebook, and the rapport you hold with Chris Cox. I get it, its in fashion to shit on facebook. How about a different view? 13 years, wealth, changes in life, believe that he could be doing something different? [1]https://techcrunch.com/2018/09/26/whatsapp-founder-brian-acton-says-facebook-used-him-to-get-its-acquisition-past-eu-regulators/ https://techcrunch.com/2018/09/26/whatsapp-founder-brian-act... [2]https://www.cnbc.com/2018/06/12/oculus-founder-palmer-luckey-on-facebook-be-careful-who-you-trust.html https://www.cnbc.com/2018/06/12/oculus-founder-palmer-luckey...
- mindgam3 8y ago
  Brian Acton and Palmer Luckey are not even close to the level of "high profile departure" as Chris Cox. Acton and Luckey both joined Facebook in 2014 as part of multibillion dollar acquisitions. They are like hired mercenaries and were never on the inside, or even close. Chris Cox joined in 2005, fresh out of college. He has been a true believer and one of Zuck's most trusted lieutenants since almost day one. Of the people who worked there early, like pre 2008, I am not aware of a single one who is outspoken in criticism of Facebook.
- ignoramous 8y ago
  Acton 'lost' $850m in the process. https://www.cnbc.com/2018/09/26/whatsapp-co-founder-explains-why-he-left-facebook.html https://www.cnbc.com/2018/09/26/whatsapp-co-founder-explains...
- dang 8y ago
  This comment crosses into personal attack, which breaks the site guidelines: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html. Can you please make your points neutrally and respectfully in the future? It's important for the survival of the community here.

kjar 8y ago

A non-disparagement clause is so fucking bonkers. I read these things and would never sign something like that. It’s a blatant corporate attack on your freedom of speech and absolutely insulting as a human. You pay me. You do not control me!

avinium 8y ago
You're not wrong. But ethics can become a lot more flexible when someone's dangling a few million in stock options in front of your face.
- j-c-hewitt 8y ago
  Flip it around. If you are an employee partly compensated in stock, is it fair for a multi-billionaire who was one of your former bosses to flippantly trash talk the company in public after he cashes out, potentially damaging the value of your stock...? Wouldn't you want your employer to put some controls into place to prevent that kind of pointless harm to you? You can still talk about literally anything else if you sign a non-disparagement clause or an NDA.
  - Jach 8y ago
    > You can still talk about literally anything else if you sign a non-disparagement clause or an NDA. Why does this matter? It reminds me of the joke about how in America we value free speech so much that we can badmouth our leaders in public, but so what, in Soviet Russia they can badmouth the American leaders in public too. The question of how free your speech is, is determined by what you can't say, or can't get away with saying, without paying some hefty consequence (a punch, a fine, losing your job, imprisonment, forfeiting RSUs...).
    - leetcrew 8y ago
      think about it another way: it's blackmail against your employer that is actually initiated by the employer itself. you don't even have to make any threats and it's not illegal!
- zimablue 8y ago
  Maybe the answer is just to make them illegal.
Jach 8y ago
> You pay me. You do not control me! That's why these things come with payment -- or for NDAs, a threat to make you pay them.
- congressonndas 8y ago
  Check out what Ted Lieu, Representative from the LA area, had to say about NDAs: https://twitter.com/tedlieu/status/1105961668029358086 https://twitter.com/tedlieu/status/1105961668029358086 > @tedlieu I am authorized to make the following statement: If you feel silenced by an NDA and need help from a Congressional committee, please contact, or have your attorney contact, the House Judiciary Committee. ——- For topics of societal and national concern, House subpoenas could be a good way to force disclosure — of things companies are trying to hide, via paying off employees in exchange for NDAs.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
lawnchair_larry 8y ago
If you got paid what he is getting paid to keep your mouth shut, I think you would.
- clairity 8y ago
  doubtful. he's already got f-u money. a couple million more doesn't matter. what's probably more likely is that his net worth is highly correlated with facebook's, and disparagement could materially affect that.
  - creato 8y ago
    Maybe he simply isn't that confident in that opinion to state it so bluntly. I agree with the "reading between the lines" interpretation that this guy probably thinks facebook is a bad thing. But, thinking that, and coming out strongly with that position while holding such an influential position are two very different things. If I had such influence I'd certainly be hesitant to just go all guns blazing, and I'm someone that strongly believes social media (primarily facebook) is a serious threat to civilized society.
mbesto 8y ago
> I read these things and would never sign something like that. Ya, everyone does until they look at their bank account.

keepper 8y ago

"Facebook has a well documented history of requiring outgoing employees to sign non-disparagement clauses." You're basically lying here. They don't. Actually, the last few high profile departures were pretty disparaging. Think Brian Acton's comments[1], as well as Palmer lucky[2]. You obviously are overplaying your knowledge of Facebook, and the rapport you hold with Chris Cox. I get it, its in fashion to shit on facebook. How about a different view? 13 years, wealth, changes in life, believe that he could be doing something different? [1]https://techcrunch.com/2018/09/26/whatsapp-founder-brian-acton-says-facebook-used-him-to-get-its-acquisition-past-eu-regulators/ https://techcrunch.com/2018/09/26/whatsapp-founder-brian-act... [2]https://www.cnbc.com/2018/06/12/oculus-founder-palmer-luckey-on-facebook-be-careful-who-you-trust.html https://www.cnbc.com/2018/06/12/oculus-founder-palmer-luckey...

mindgam3 8y ago
Brian Acton and Palmer Luckey are not even close to the level of "high profile departure" as Chris Cox. Acton and Luckey both joined Facebook in 2014 as part of multibillion dollar acquisitions. They are like hired mercenaries and were never on the inside, or even close. Chris Cox joined in 2005, fresh out of college. He has been a true believer and one of Zuck's most trusted lieutenants since almost day one. Of the people who worked there early, like pre 2008, I am not aware of a single one who is outspoken in criticism of Facebook.
ignoramous 8y ago
Acton 'lost' $850m in the process. https://www.cnbc.com/2018/09/26/whatsapp-co-founder-explains-why-he-left-facebook.html https://www.cnbc.com/2018/09/26/whatsapp-co-founder-explains...
dang 8y ago
This comment crosses into personal attack, which breaks the site guidelines: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html. Can you please make your points neutrally and respectfully in the future? It's important for the survival of the community here.