7 ms·

> Coinbase's stance there is fair, reasonable and moral The 60 people who left makes it clear this is not agreed upon. HN has already played out this debate on

> Coinbase's stance there is fair, reasonable and moral The 60 people who left makes it clear this is not agreed upon. HN has already played out this debate on the original post so I'll save going into it here, but it's disingenuous to say that Russ didn't quit because of race-related policy, whether or not you think the policy is race-related. That said, putting out that "apolitical stance" in the direct wake of George Floyd/BLM is unavoidably tied. As others have said, timing is key. If they had the policy from day 1, they might have a leg to stand on. It seems likely in context with this article (and frankly, to many before this) that Coinbase's apolitical stance is not a rejection of all politics but a tacit rejection of George Floyd/BLM. No one should be surprised about a diversity problem in such a company. This "what else can they do?" question stems from a criminal judicial standard of guilt and conviction, but that is not where this discussion exists. To think that Coinbase must be innocent and needs to prove that over many former employees being on the record + clear statistical issues that all align with the narrative the company has set with previous actions shows a central flaw in the tech community's approach to racism and politics. I realize the question does not direct say that they must be innocent, but the implications and assumptions here are important to note, and certainly lean in that direction.

SpicyLemonZest 6y ago
Are there other non-crypto political stances Coinbase has taken? It seems to me that this was just the first time they needed such a policy. I certainly wouldn't have anticipated the possibility of a new political slogan that almost every major company is forced to chant.
- adjkant 6y ago
  Many companies regularly work within mainstream political action such as LGTBQ+ rights, data privacy, homelessness, local housing or public works, and children's orgs such as Big Brother Big Sister. While these vary in controversiality, relevancy, and apolitical nature, it's not at all uncommon to see companies working in these areas (and others unlisted). Often companies grow into them along with size and profits, so I don't know if Coinbase historically can be taken as sign of consistency either. What Coinbase did was effectively say "well now that BLM has entered mainstream politics and other companies are taking stances, we no longer feel that the mainstream politics of the industry are agreeable to us." The George Floyd spark very much "outed" Coinbase here, because it became an issue you couldn't avoid taking a side on. That's just the state of the world and you're right that they couldn't have anticipated it, but they chose to make a clear stance rather than trying to ride the thin line, and they became less diverse for it. I don't know why anyone would be surprised their prior actions match that recent stance. Again, I'm trying to avoid the philosophical "Should companies be political" debate that's already been hashed, but simply stating how their actions translate in the current landscape.
  - SpicyLemonZest 6y ago
    If Wired's reporting is accurate (https://www.wired.com/story/turmoil-black-lives-matter-political-speech-coinbase/ https://www.wired.com/story/turmoil-black-lives-matter-polit...), Coinbase did try to ride the line, but a bunch of activists demanded for Armstrong to publicly chant the slogan and eventually went on strike until he did.
    - adjkant 6y ago
      Then they made their choice - their employees believed their company was not supporting them as people and forced the issue. Coinbase then chose its side. Is there anything more to say?
      - jlokier 6y ago
        From those actions alone you can't determine if Coinbase rejected George Floyd/BLM, or rejected all kinds of slogan chanting that the CEO was pressured to chant by strikes. It was, after all the first time he was pressured that way.
        adjkant 6y ago
        I disagree from my interpretation of what we do know. They could have made the case about that specifically if they wanted to, but they decided to deflect with a blanket policy on politics. To say we can't determine anything is silly - we're making best guess judgements, not trying Coinbase in court for murder. I've made this comment elsewhere, but I really would love to know why people are digging in so hard here. Let's just call a spade a spade.
        deleted 6y ago
        [deleted]
    - secondcoming 6y ago
      This series explains it all https://youtu.be/p5Wny9TstEM https://youtu.be/p5Wny9TstEM
bmarquez 6y ago
> The 60 people who left makes it clear this is not agreed upon. Did all 60 people leave because of Coinbase's political stance, or did some leave because of the generous severance package of 4-6 months pay that the CEO offered in September? I know that if I were looking to make a life change, I'd seriously consider that offer even if I liked the politics.
- adjkant 6y ago
  We can only speculate on the numbers, but it can always be a both/and situation. This culture/environment itself can be part of the reason for wanting that life change. But forget number speculation, we have concrete proof of this in the article: > another employee who left in October was John Russ, the head of marketing and the company’s highest ranking Black employee, who had been hired three months earlier. > In a brief phone interview, Mr. Russ would only say that he disagreed with Mr. Armstrong’s new position and left as a result.
  - nullc 6y ago
    > We can only speculate on the numbers, We can, but we can only do this because people in the comments are independently informed. The NYT repeatedly emphasized 60 people leaving (across two articles) but never mentioned the severance.
- cbthrow91 6y ago
  Can anecdotally list 5 people who opportunistically took the package and were planning to make moves anyhow
ejanus 6y ago
We are in dynamic world and businesses need to stay away from politics and focus on its core value. Someone leaving has nothing to do with racism. We live in a time where few people and the media are manipulating the rest. Note that I am Black too.
- tonfreed 6y ago
  When penguin employees are having a cry about a guy that published a book with all the life advice a good father would give, I'm really not surprised there's people out there shoving their hands out looking for or concessions not granted to anyone else. It's a uniquely American thing that the academic grifters with nothing better to do are desperately trying to import here as well.

SpicyLemonZest 6y ago

Are there other non-crypto political stances Coinbase has taken? It seems to me that this was just the first time they needed such a policy. I certainly wouldn't have anticipated the possibility of a new political slogan that almost every major company is forced to chant.

adjkant 6y ago
Many companies regularly work within mainstream political action such as LGTBQ+ rights, data privacy, homelessness, local housing or public works, and children's orgs such as Big Brother Big Sister. While these vary in controversiality, relevancy, and apolitical nature, it's not at all uncommon to see companies working in these areas (and others unlisted). Often companies grow into them along with size and profits, so I don't know if Coinbase historically can be taken as sign of consistency either. What Coinbase did was effectively say "well now that BLM has entered mainstream politics and other companies are taking stances, we no longer feel that the mainstream politics of the industry are agreeable to us." The George Floyd spark very much "outed" Coinbase here, because it became an issue you couldn't avoid taking a side on. That's just the state of the world and you're right that they couldn't have anticipated it, but they chose to make a clear stance rather than trying to ride the thin line, and they became less diverse for it. I don't know why anyone would be surprised their prior actions match that recent stance. Again, I'm trying to avoid the philosophical "Should companies be political" debate that's already been hashed, but simply stating how their actions translate in the current landscape.
- SpicyLemonZest 6y ago
  If Wired's reporting is accurate (https://www.wired.com/story/turmoil-black-lives-matter-political-speech-coinbase/ https://www.wired.com/story/turmoil-black-lives-matter-polit...), Coinbase did try to ride the line, but a bunch of activists demanded for Armstrong to publicly chant the slogan and eventually went on strike until he did.
  - adjkant 6y ago
    Then they made their choice - their employees believed their company was not supporting them as people and forced the issue. Coinbase then chose its side. Is there anything more to say?
    - jlokier 6y ago
      From those actions alone you can't determine if Coinbase rejected George Floyd/BLM, or rejected all kinds of slogan chanting that the CEO was pressured to chant by strikes. It was, after all the first time he was pressured that way.
      - adjkant 6y ago
        I disagree from my interpretation of what we do know. They could have made the case about that specifically if they wanted to, but they decided to deflect with a blanket policy on politics. To say we can't determine anything is silly - we're making best guess judgements, not trying Coinbase in court for murder. I've made this comment elsewhere, but I really would love to know why people are digging in so hard here. Let's just call a spade a spade.
        deleted 6y ago
        [deleted]
  - secondcoming 6y ago
    This series explains it all https://youtu.be/p5Wny9TstEM https://youtu.be/p5Wny9TstEM

bmarquez 6y ago

> The 60 people who left makes it clear this is not agreed upon. Did all 60 people leave because of Coinbase's political stance, or did some leave because of the generous severance package of 4-6 months pay that the CEO offered in September? I know that if I were looking to make a life change, I'd seriously consider that offer even if I liked the politics.

adjkant 6y ago
We can only speculate on the numbers, but it can always be a both/and situation. This culture/environment itself can be part of the reason for wanting that life change. But forget number speculation, we have concrete proof of this in the article: > another employee who left in October was John Russ, the head of marketing and the company’s highest ranking Black employee, who had been hired three months earlier. > In a brief phone interview, Mr. Russ would only say that he disagreed with Mr. Armstrong’s new position and left as a result.
- nullc 6y ago
  > We can only speculate on the numbers, We can, but we can only do this because people in the comments are independently informed. The NYT repeatedly emphasized 60 people leaving (across two articles) but never mentioned the severance.
cbthrow91 6y ago
Can anecdotally list 5 people who opportunistically took the package and were planning to make moves anyhow

ejanus 6y ago

We are in dynamic world and businesses need to stay away from politics and focus on its core value. Someone leaving has nothing to do with racism. We live in a time where few people and the media are manipulating the rest. Note that I am Black too.

tonfreed 6y ago
When penguin employees are having a cry about a guy that published a book with all the life advice a good father would give, I'm really not surprised there's people out there shoving their hands out looking for or concessions not granted to anyone else. It's a uniquely American thing that the academic grifters with nothing better to do are desperately trying to import here as well.