3 ms·

This is how enterprise sales are done.

by LiNeXT 7y ago

minimuffins 7y ago
I don't care.
- LiNeXT 7y ago
  You don't? Then why are you commenting here?
- lykr0n 7y ago
  that's a good way to get people to care about the points you're making.
  - minimuffins 7y ago
    The main point is clear. The way that Github, a big, influential tech company owned by an even bigger more influential tech company, decides to align itself with ICE, is inherently political, regardless of "how enterprise sales works."
    - LiNeXT 7y ago
      Selling a piece of enterprise software != alignment. It's a sale, nothing more.
SolaceQuantum 7y ago
If Blizzard can be panned for its enterprise-style move to strip winnings from pro-HK messaging tournament winner in order to better ameliorate itself to a large potential consumer base, why isn’t GitHub allowed to be panned for its enterprise moves in pursuing sales with an organization that is embroiled in political scandal?
- LiNeXT 7y ago
  There is a vast difference between selling software to your own government for their use and directly, actively, and punitively screwing with an individual a foreign government doesn't like.
  - SolaceQuantum 7y ago
    It was done in order to continue friendly relations with a potential client base. Wasn’t Amazons Ring panned for giving data to the police? Don’t we have a thread on the front page right now about Google giving personal data to the DoJ?
    - JumpCrisscross 7y ago
      > It was done in order to continue friendly relations with a potential client base The analogous action for GitHub to Blizzard’s would be booting a user ICE doesn't like to maintain friendly ties with the latter. That hasn't happened.
      - SolaceQuantum 7y ago
        Didn’t GitLab do this?
        input_sh 7y ago
        As far as I know, not quite. GitLab modified their customer acceptance so that it gives them an option to refuse a client, saying that they will reach such a decision on a case-by-case basis: https://gitlab.com/gitlab-com/www-gitlab-com/merge_requests/32614/diffs https://gitlab.com/gitlab-com/www-gitlab-com/merge_requests/... ...while Chef's CEO openly said that they will not renew their contract with ICE and CBP, as well as to donate the equivalent revenue of their current contracts to charities that help people impacted: https://blog.chef.io/an-important-update-from-chef/ https://blog.chef.io/an-important-update-from-chef/ > After deep introspection and dialog within Chef, we will not renew our current contracts with ICE and CBP when they expire over the next year. Chef will fulfill our full obligations under the current contracts.

This is how enterprise sales are done.

by LiNeXT 7y ago

This is how enterprise sales are done.

minimuffins 7y ago

I don't care.

LiNeXT 7y ago
You don't? Then why are you commenting here?
lykr0n 7y ago
that's a good way to get people to care about the points you're making.
- minimuffins 7y ago
  The main point is clear. The way that Github, a big, influential tech company owned by an even bigger more influential tech company, decides to align itself with ICE, is inherently political, regardless of "how enterprise sales works."
  - LiNeXT 7y ago
    Selling a piece of enterprise software != alignment. It's a sale, nothing more.

SolaceQuantum 7y ago

If Blizzard can be panned for its enterprise-style move to strip winnings from pro-HK messaging tournament winner in order to better ameliorate itself to a large potential consumer base, why isn’t GitHub allowed to be panned for its enterprise moves in pursuing sales with an organization that is embroiled in political scandal?

LiNeXT 7y ago
There is a vast difference between selling software to your own government for their use and directly, actively, and punitively screwing with an individual a foreign government doesn't like.
- SolaceQuantum 7y ago
  It was done in order to continue friendly relations with a potential client base. Wasn’t Amazons Ring panned for giving data to the police? Don’t we have a thread on the front page right now about Google giving personal data to the DoJ?
  - JumpCrisscross 7y ago
    > It was done in order to continue friendly relations with a potential client base The analogous action for GitHub to Blizzard’s would be booting a user ICE doesn't like to maintain friendly ties with the latter. That hasn't happened.
    - SolaceQuantum 7y ago
      Didn’t GitLab do this?
      - input_sh 7y ago
        As far as I know, not quite. GitLab modified their customer acceptance so that it gives them an option to refuse a client, saying that they will reach such a decision on a case-by-case basis: https://gitlab.com/gitlab-com/www-gitlab-com/merge_requests/32614/diffs https://gitlab.com/gitlab-com/www-gitlab-com/merge_requests/... ...while Chef's CEO openly said that they will not renew their contract with ICE and CBP, as well as to donate the equivalent revenue of their current contracts to charities that help people impacted: https://blog.chef.io/an-important-update-from-chef/ https://blog.chef.io/an-important-update-from-chef/ > After deep introspection and dialog within Chef, we will not renew our current contracts with ICE and CBP when they expire over the next year. Chef will fulfill our full obligations under the current contracts.