3 ms·

> Would you go to work at Apple if you're a Free Software activist? I think if Basecamp had been clear about the funny names list in their hiring process, thei

> Would you go to work at Apple if you're a Free Software activist? I think if Basecamp had been clear about the funny names list in their hiring process, their candidate pool would be a bit different.

Daishiman 6y ago
I think that if you're that upset about the sort of thing that happens in every single place where there's customer support and people need to vent, then you have no place working in a customer-facing position. People vent, and they do so without thinking too much because they spent every single customer interaction censoring themselves and thinking deeply about how not leave a bad impression. DHH did the right thing: they owned up to the problem, finished it, and moved on. If you're going to complain about every possible grievance and unsavory behavior you're not gonna be a person that will get along with peers.
- tomlockwood 6y ago
  I'm not sure why you've extrapolated this kind of behavior to every customer support position. I've not encountered it in any of the ones I've worked. Also, I'm not seeing evidence that the Basecamp employees that had an issue with this behavior were "going to complain about every possible grievance".
  - Daishiman 6y ago
    > I'm not sure why you've extrapolated this kind of behavior to every customer support position. I've not encountered it in any of the ones I've worked. I've not extrapolated it to every position, but I've worked with enough industries to know that there many have very difficult customers and it takes a toll. > Also, I'm not seeing evidence that the Basecamp employees that had an issue with this behavior were "going to complain about every possible grievance". DHH alluded to certain analogies in the discussion of racial and ethnic prejudices triggering needlessly emotional responses, and frankly I totally agree that a lot of contemporary framings of certain discussions don't allow for tolerating disagreement. And if you're going for those discussions that are going to draw such strong lines, yeah, either you rein in the discussion soon or you allow your teams to be fragmented needlessly. And the same thing happens with management. Management isn't going to be willing to entertain every single discussion. To me it was clear from the start that they had limited energy to discuss the topic and once that was up it was time to move on. They may be right or wrong, but being clear on it is better than being ambiguous or allowing the thing to continue.
    - tomlockwood 6y ago
      > needlessly emotional responses This isn't objective at all - and illustrates the problem perfectly.
      - Daishiman 6y ago
        On the contrary, it's in the face of ambiguity and subjectivity that management has to make hard decisions based on philosophy and values; leadership exists to clarify grey areas. And the difference between management making those decisions and staff is that management is ultimately where the responsibility for those decisions, right or wrong, lies. On subjective policies a lot of things will come down to personal judgement calls. The founders have spoken as such; and frankly if staff considers the decision to egregious, at this point, they're free to assess whether their values are compatible or not.
        tomlockwood 6y ago
        > On the contrary, it's in the face of ambiguity and subjectivity that management has to make hard decisions based on philosophy and values; leadership exists to clarify grey areas. From the article: "That confusion is compounded by the fact that, for a small company, Basecamp has taken an outsized number of political stances — all of which employees are encouraged to discuss. Most prominently, the company and its founders have been vocal critics of Apple’s 30 percent tax on in-app purchases. But it has also involved itself in politics at a much lower level: in 2018 Basecamp let a candidate for Chicago mayor use its office in the West Loop as a campaign headquarters. Basecamp employees are encouraged to discuss the company’s own political positions — or, perhaps more accurately, the founders’ political positions — as much as they like. Keeping track of which issues of the moment are up for discussion thus becomes one more chunk of mental overhead for employees who are already struggling." There's no clarification here - since they've banned political discussion and this is a subjective boundary - nothing has been adequately clarified. And saying they're just banning the "needlessly emotional responses" is again, not clear.
        6y ago

Daishiman 6y ago

I think that if you're that upset about the sort of thing that happens in every single place where there's customer support and people need to vent, then you have no place working in a customer-facing position. People vent, and they do so without thinking too much because they spent every single customer interaction censoring themselves and thinking deeply about how not leave a bad impression. DHH did the right thing: they owned up to the problem, finished it, and moved on. If you're going to complain about every possible grievance and unsavory behavior you're not gonna be a person that will get along with peers.

tomlockwood 6y ago
I'm not sure why you've extrapolated this kind of behavior to every customer support position. I've not encountered it in any of the ones I've worked. Also, I'm not seeing evidence that the Basecamp employees that had an issue with this behavior were "going to complain about every possible grievance".
- Daishiman 6y ago
  > I'm not sure why you've extrapolated this kind of behavior to every customer support position. I've not encountered it in any of the ones I've worked. I've not extrapolated it to every position, but I've worked with enough industries to know that there many have very difficult customers and it takes a toll. > Also, I'm not seeing evidence that the Basecamp employees that had an issue with this behavior were "going to complain about every possible grievance". DHH alluded to certain analogies in the discussion of racial and ethnic prejudices triggering needlessly emotional responses, and frankly I totally agree that a lot of contemporary framings of certain discussions don't allow for tolerating disagreement. And if you're going for those discussions that are going to draw such strong lines, yeah, either you rein in the discussion soon or you allow your teams to be fragmented needlessly. And the same thing happens with management. Management isn't going to be willing to entertain every single discussion. To me it was clear from the start that they had limited energy to discuss the topic and once that was up it was time to move on. They may be right or wrong, but being clear on it is better than being ambiguous or allowing the thing to continue.
  - tomlockwood 6y ago
    > needlessly emotional responses This isn't objective at all - and illustrates the problem perfectly.
    - Daishiman 6y ago
      On the contrary, it's in the face of ambiguity and subjectivity that management has to make hard decisions based on philosophy and values; leadership exists to clarify grey areas. And the difference between management making those decisions and staff is that management is ultimately where the responsibility for those decisions, right or wrong, lies. On subjective policies a lot of things will come down to personal judgement calls. The founders have spoken as such; and frankly if staff considers the decision to egregious, at this point, they're free to assess whether their values are compatible or not.
      - tomlockwood 6y ago
        > On the contrary, it's in the face of ambiguity and subjectivity that management has to make hard decisions based on philosophy and values; leadership exists to clarify grey areas. From the article: "That confusion is compounded by the fact that, for a small company, Basecamp has taken an outsized number of political stances — all of which employees are encouraged to discuss. Most prominently, the company and its founders have been vocal critics of Apple’s 30 percent tax on in-app purchases. But it has also involved itself in politics at a much lower level: in 2018 Basecamp let a candidate for Chicago mayor use its office in the West Loop as a campaign headquarters. Basecamp employees are encouraged to discuss the company’s own political positions — or, perhaps more accurately, the founders’ political positions — as much as they like. Keeping track of which issues of the moment are up for discussion thus becomes one more chunk of mental overhead for employees who are already struggling." There's no clarification here - since they've banned political discussion and this is a subjective boundary - nothing has been adequately clarified. And saying they're just banning the "needlessly emotional responses" is again, not clear.
        6y ago