6 ms·

Stack Overflow is doing me ongoing harm

97 points by dsiegel2275 7y ago

dsiegel2275 7y ago
OP here, disclosure: I worked with Monica for several years, so I know her professionally. Everything that I have read about this situation and how she was treated is appalling.
greatjack613 7y ago
Very happy this has come to the attention of hacker news. As a regular contributor to SO it has really bothered me with how she was treated, I think with the support of the HN community we can make a difference.
- kbenson 7y ago
  Maybe you can give some back story, or point to where it's summarized fairly well? (maybe it was even on HN and I missed it?) All I see here are a list of what SO did wrong, but only from one side, and not why they felt the need to do so (even if only explained post-facto). As a member of the HN community, I think it only makes sense to attempt to get as much information as possible, lest this turn into and angry internet mob situation that no longer cares about details and facts. We have enough of those already.
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
  - wilde 7y ago
    https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/335088 https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/335088
- csense 7y ago
  This seems like Part 4 or Part 5 of an ongoing story. What's going on, for those of us who missed Parts 1-3?
  - luckylion 7y ago
    My personal take is that SO wants to go mainstream and has hired a new CEO who's first order of business was to assert his power and demonstrate the site's new direction: corporation instead of community. They decided to make an example of a well-respected moderator to show that nobody is above the needs of the party err corporation. They expected her to violate the terms of a new code of conduct regarding gender pronouns ("use the preferred gender pronouns of users if they make them known", the pronouns include neo-pronouns like ze, ey, thon, peh etc) that was being written and prepared to be released. When internally announcing the outlines, she asked to clarify whether the use of they/them would be allowed if an individual was uncomfortable using the preferred pronouns, and this was taken to mean she would aggressively misgender people out of spite. The community has told them to bugger off, 15-20% of volunteer moderators have resigned and the divide between the users generating the content and the employees has increased even more. Users mistrust employees because of lies and deceit and employees are terrified of engaging the users because they feel like walking out of the palace to talk to a group of villagers wielding pitchforks. The CTO has protected his subordinates and taken the blame in an issued statement, meanwhile they've leaked selected details on reddit and slandered the moderator to the press (misgendering her in the process, violating their new code of conduct; can't have a show trial without making it obvious it isn't about the alleged acts).
    - wool_gather 7y ago
      Minor correction, this all actually went down before the new CEO was on board. It's very hard to tell for sure from the outside, but there seems to be a Director (the person who blabbed to the Register) at the core of it. On the other hand, the CTO posted as well, effectively in the Director's defense, so who knows.
  - upofadown 7y ago
    My best guess was that the person in question was suspected of being bigoted against trans people. That comes from the fact that she was actually called a bigot in the discussion that supposedly triggered the firing. That probably came from her suggestion that one could get around using pronouns they didn't like by using a more generic "they". Sort of like a racial bigot wanting a definite list of words that were racial slurs that they could avoid using. Is suspicion of bigotry reasonable grounds for a firing? Well, if it was, there would be whole areas of the world with no employment. Normally people with such ideas merely need to keep them to themselves while at work and while interacting with coworkers.
lonelappde 7y ago
SE and Chipps mistreated Cellio and were obnoxious about firing Cellio, but I don't see anything in that post about "ongoing harm". Ongoing harm would be if, hypothetically, people were harassing Cellio on Twitter or in meatspace over SE's slander, or if employers or customers shuned Cellio.
- ars 7y ago
  > were harassing Cellio on Twitter https://twitter.com/bitandbang/status/1182389562846384129 https://twitter.com/bitandbang/status/1182389562846384129 She's not named, but the slander is obvious.
  - upofadown 7y ago
    That is clearly directed at the people resigning in protest, not the person that got fired.
solidasparagus 7y ago
SO is mismanaging this so awfully. Also kinda funny that she gets fired for using the term 'they' and then Stack Overflow goes and talks to the media about her firing and refers to her as 'they'.
- curyous 7y ago
  It's not just mismanagement of the situation, SO is actually behaving badly.
- jeffFrom18F 7y ago
  If SO was just about maintaining the community and running a useful Q&A site then it would be very strange that Sara Chipps still has a job right now. I can only guess it's because there is something else going on with SO the business and she is executing exactly according to plan.
WillDaSilva 7y ago
As time goes on, StackExchange is becoming less concerned about what their users desire, and less concerned about meta in general. I hope Monica is vindicated, but I expect StackExchange will continue down this unfortunate path. To my knowledge, there are no decent alternatives to what StackExchange offers.
deca6cda37d0 7y ago
It’s the end of SO as we know it. If they don’t turn this around it will demise slowly.
- Gibbon1 7y ago
  Seems exactly like SO as we know it.
why-oh-why 7y ago
More context: https://judaism.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5193/stack-overflow-inc-sinat-chinam-and-the-goat-for-azazel https://judaism.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5193/stack-... However I’m not familiar with the situation.
- Double_a_92 7y ago
  Thanks. Sometimes posts are really confusing. Without context this to me seems like some random person complaining very generically about their employer... For anyone else wondering: It's about someone that got their moderator rights removed from StackExchange after they were sceptical of CoC changes that involved preferred pronouns and such.
kstenerud 7y ago
I have no clue about this situation, but given the allegations, this looks like it would be better handled as a slander and libel case in court.
- luckylion 7y ago
  It looks like this is her trying to avoid having to go there. As far as I understand, slander & libel cases are also extremely hard to win for victims in the US, so they typically avoid them.
  - wool_gather 7y ago
    The Stack company also added forced arbitration to their TOS a year or two ago. That may be an impediment for her.
    - SnarkAsh 7y ago
      She opted out within the 30 day window, so her options remain open.
tinus_hn 7y ago
She’s been removed from a volunteer position at a company and threatens lawsuits. Good luck with that!
- wool_gather 7y ago
  The removal is not the legal issue; s__t-talking about her to the press is.
  - tinus_hn 7y ago
    Haha good luck with that as well.
lgats 7y ago
This posts builds on the previous HN discussion "Stack Overflow Inc. Fiasco: Timeline" from 17 days ago https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21173643 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21173643
Japhy_Ryder 7y ago
You got fired. Deal with it. Move on.

97 points by dsiegel2275 7y ago

OP here, disclosure: I worked with Monica for several years, so I know her professionally. Everything that I have read about this situation and how she was treated is appalling.

greatjack613 7y ago

Very happy this has come to the attention of hacker news. As a regular contributor to SO it has really bothered me with how she was treated, I think with the support of the HN community we can make a difference.

kbenson 7y ago
Maybe you can give some back story, or point to where it's summarized fairly well? (maybe it was even on HN and I missed it?) All I see here are a list of what SO did wrong, but only from one side, and not why they felt the need to do so (even if only explained post-facto). As a member of the HN community, I think it only makes sense to attempt to get as much information as possible, lest this turn into and angry internet mob situation that no longer cares about details and facts. We have enough of those already.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- wilde 7y ago
  https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/335088 https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/335088
csense 7y ago
This seems like Part 4 or Part 5 of an ongoing story. What's going on, for those of us who missed Parts 1-3?
- luckylion 7y ago
  My personal take is that SO wants to go mainstream and has hired a new CEO who's first order of business was to assert his power and demonstrate the site's new direction: corporation instead of community. They decided to make an example of a well-respected moderator to show that nobody is above the needs of the party err corporation. They expected her to violate the terms of a new code of conduct regarding gender pronouns ("use the preferred gender pronouns of users if they make them known", the pronouns include neo-pronouns like ze, ey, thon, peh etc) that was being written and prepared to be released. When internally announcing the outlines, she asked to clarify whether the use of they/them would be allowed if an individual was uncomfortable using the preferred pronouns, and this was taken to mean she would aggressively misgender people out of spite. The community has told them to bugger off, 15-20% of volunteer moderators have resigned and the divide between the users generating the content and the employees has increased even more. Users mistrust employees because of lies and deceit and employees are terrified of engaging the users because they feel like walking out of the palace to talk to a group of villagers wielding pitchforks. The CTO has protected his subordinates and taken the blame in an issued statement, meanwhile they've leaked selected details on reddit and slandered the moderator to the press (misgendering her in the process, violating their new code of conduct; can't have a show trial without making it obvious it isn't about the alleged acts).
  - wool_gather 7y ago
    Minor correction, this all actually went down before the new CEO was on board. It's very hard to tell for sure from the outside, but there seems to be a Director (the person who blabbed to the Register) at the core of it. On the other hand, the CTO posted as well, effectively in the Director's defense, so who knows.
- upofadown 7y ago
  My best guess was that the person in question was suspected of being bigoted against trans people. That comes from the fact that she was actually called a bigot in the discussion that supposedly triggered the firing. That probably came from her suggestion that one could get around using pronouns they didn't like by using a more generic "they". Sort of like a racial bigot wanting a definite list of words that were racial slurs that they could avoid using. Is suspicion of bigotry reasonable grounds for a firing? Well, if it was, there would be whole areas of the world with no employment. Normally people with such ideas merely need to keep them to themselves while at work and while interacting with coworkers.

lonelappde 7y ago

SE and Chipps mistreated Cellio and were obnoxious about firing Cellio, but I don't see anything in that post about "ongoing harm". Ongoing harm would be if, hypothetically, people were harassing Cellio on Twitter or in meatspace over SE's slander, or if employers or customers shuned Cellio.

ars 7y ago
> were harassing Cellio on Twitter https://twitter.com/bitandbang/status/1182389562846384129 https://twitter.com/bitandbang/status/1182389562846384129 She's not named, but the slander is obvious.
- upofadown 7y ago
  That is clearly directed at the people resigning in protest, not the person that got fired.

solidasparagus 7y ago

SO is mismanaging this so awfully. Also kinda funny that she gets fired for using the term 'they' and then Stack Overflow goes and talks to the media about her firing and refers to her as 'they'.

curyous 7y ago
It's not just mismanagement of the situation, SO is actually behaving badly.
jeffFrom18F 7y ago
If SO was just about maintaining the community and running a useful Q&A site then it would be very strange that Sara Chipps still has a job right now. I can only guess it's because there is something else going on with SO the business and she is executing exactly according to plan.

WillDaSilva 7y ago

As time goes on, StackExchange is becoming less concerned about what their users desire, and less concerned about meta in general. I hope Monica is vindicated, but I expect StackExchange will continue down this unfortunate path. To my knowledge, there are no decent alternatives to what StackExchange offers.

deca6cda37d0 7y ago

It’s the end of SO as we know it. If they don’t turn this around it will demise slowly.

Gibbon1 7y ago
Seems exactly like SO as we know it.

why-oh-why 7y ago

More context: https://judaism.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5193/stack-overflow-inc-sinat-chinam-and-the-goat-for-azazel https://judaism.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5193/stack-... However I’m not familiar with the situation.

Double_a_92 7y ago
Thanks. Sometimes posts are really confusing. Without context this to me seems like some random person complaining very generically about their employer... For anyone else wondering: It's about someone that got their moderator rights removed from StackExchange after they were sceptical of CoC changes that involved preferred pronouns and such.

kstenerud 7y ago

I have no clue about this situation, but given the allegations, this looks like it would be better handled as a slander and libel case in court.

luckylion 7y ago
It looks like this is her trying to avoid having to go there. As far as I understand, slander & libel cases are also extremely hard to win for victims in the US, so they typically avoid them.
- wool_gather 7y ago
  The Stack company also added forced arbitration to their TOS a year or two ago. That may be an impediment for her.
  - SnarkAsh 7y ago
    She opted out within the 30 day window, so her options remain open.

tinus_hn 7y ago

She’s been removed from a volunteer position at a company and threatens lawsuits. Good luck with that!

wool_gather 7y ago
The removal is not the legal issue; s__t-talking about her to the press is.
- tinus_hn 7y ago
  Haha good luck with that as well.

lgats 7y ago

This posts builds on the previous HN discussion "Stack Overflow Inc. Fiasco: Timeline" from 17 days ago https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21173643 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21173643

Japhy_Ryder 7y ago

You got fired. Deal with it. Move on.