6 ms·

As an European. I don't get this. So, employees create a list for making fun of people. Employees start to fight each other because they take offense. Compan

by midrus 5y ago

As an European. I don't get this. So, employees create a list for making fun of people. Employees start to fight each other because they take offense. Company states at work, you're supposed to work, not to discuss politics. Th bad actor is the company so we all leave. (??!!!) Honestly, I don't get it. I think it is a cultural thing in the US, due to the long term racism issues ,etc. And how extremely easy is for Americans to feel offended. Sorry if that hurts, I accept your down otra but would appreciate what I am missing. As somebody from a first world european country, we go to work to work. If we're developers we're expected to do development. We like football (soccer) and some like politics and discussing controversial stuff, but we do that in the proper forums. For football it is the pub. For politics ist is elections, friends and family. Business are business and we're there because we need money and a profession we like. I feel these problems happen only in America, it sad to see this going on.

libraryatnight 5y ago
You completely omit the company's actual response. If the company had shut down the list as being unprofessional and that "work is for work" we wouldn't be here. So I don't really get your point. Are you saying in the EU that if such a list were circulating, the business would take a stance that the list has a place in the workplace? That seems to contradict your statement that "work is for work" And, honestly, mocking your customers even if it isn't offending employees seems like something management should discourage.
- midrus 5y ago
  > If the company had shut down the list as being unprofessional and that "work is for work" we wouldn't be here Ok, I assumed this was done and part of all the changes they just did. Wasn't it? Are they still sharing the list around?
  - aniforprez 5y ago
    The problem was the initial complaint included references to something called the "Pyramid of hate" which asserts that larger conflicts and discrimination start from innocuous biases and insensitive remarks and DHH took great offence to using that image WHILE apologising for the list being circulated. He felt using that image was "catastrophizing". When people disagreed, he became vindictive and lashed out, dug up message logs of an employee to dismiss their complaints. This disturbed employees which resulted in anonymous HR complaints. And this in turn led to the situation we have now. Keep in mind, all of this seems to have been going on as they were trying to fix diversity issues in the company My reading of this seems that the internal group seems to have badgered management which was probably unprofessional and stoked some sentiment but instead of DHH simply accepting criticism and trying to diffuse the situation, aggravated it and made it far worse and instead of trying to fix the issue, shut it down completely [https://www.theverge.com/2021/4/27/22406673/basecamp-political-speech-policy-controversy https://www.theverge.com/2021/4/27/22406673/basecamp-politic...]
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
agloeregrets 5y ago
You missed a midpoint here, when employees stated that the list could be racist towards people with Asian heritage, the cofounder doubled down on it, claimed that only 10% could be, and well actuallyed it all and then shut down any communication or talk about it. It was crappy management that didn't listen to problems
- FemmeAndroid 5y ago
  Yup. It was a founder acting instigating and fanning the slightest flames of political disagreement. Your job, even if you disagree with the person your talking to, is to at the very least genuinely acknowledge the persons perspective and try and deescalate. Instead DHH seems to have continually doubled down and made things worse. As the boss, it’s your job to get people back to work. It seems like DHH, more than anyone, was causing the infighting. It wasn’t coworkers talking politics, and fighting amongst themselves, it was a boss handling criticism extremely poorly, and doubling down on defensiveness until he had to mandate his employees shut up, or quit.
  - midrus 5y ago
    Thanks for the explanation. It is a difficult situation to understand from the outside tbh. I agree dhh looks like the person that, if you agree with his points of view, everything is awesome. The moment you don't seems you'll have a hard time convincing him otherwise. So I do think the first one that should shut up (at work) ranting about politics is himself, and provide an example for others. I hope from now, with whatever number of employes they end up with, they get back to work.
- midrus 5y ago
  Sorry, I think that's the right thing to do. And should have been done a lot erlier. Like 10 years ago when the list first started. And I'd also consider firing everyone that contributed names to that list, and that I can find public conversations making fun of people names. I don't care if they are male, white, black or whatever. That doesn't matter. Making fun of peoples names, weight, religion or whatever is wrong. No discussion. You're fired for this. This is the real shameful thing here, from my biased european point of view. This is the intolerable part. Now, shutting these discussions off *from work* is the right thing to do in my opinion. Because they literally have no end, and the company is a business, which needs to build products, which needs to sell, so you have your money. If you spend your day discussing politics, you don't make money. Do you want to discuss politics? Do you really want to discuss these societal problems? I'm all in for it, lets grab a beer at 6am pm at the pub across the street and come up with a solution for these problems. Let's found a political party or an association or whatever we want to do to fix problem. At least here, in europe, the moment you propose to do these things out of work hours, you 1) See 80% lose interest in their principles and prefer to go home and enjoy their kids and 2) You get to meet with the 20% people with the real interest in fixing things for a better world. I insist in my opinion. It is not that these things should not be talked about, dismissed, or whatever. These are important things for the future. It is that your workplace *is not* the place for this.

by midrus 5y ago

libraryatnight 5y ago

You completely omit the company's actual response. If the company had shut down the list as being unprofessional and that "work is for work" we wouldn't be here. So I don't really get your point. Are you saying in the EU that if such a list were circulating, the business would take a stance that the list has a place in the workplace? That seems to contradict your statement that "work is for work" And, honestly, mocking your customers even if it isn't offending employees seems like something management should discourage.

midrus 5y ago
> If the company had shut down the list as being unprofessional and that "work is for work" we wouldn't be here Ok, I assumed this was done and part of all the changes they just did. Wasn't it? Are they still sharing the list around?
- aniforprez 5y ago
  The problem was the initial complaint included references to something called the "Pyramid of hate" which asserts that larger conflicts and discrimination start from innocuous biases and insensitive remarks and DHH took great offence to using that image WHILE apologising for the list being circulated. He felt using that image was "catastrophizing". When people disagreed, he became vindictive and lashed out, dug up message logs of an employee to dismiss their complaints. This disturbed employees which resulted in anonymous HR complaints. And this in turn led to the situation we have now. Keep in mind, all of this seems to have been going on as they were trying to fix diversity issues in the company My reading of this seems that the internal group seems to have badgered management which was probably unprofessional and stoked some sentiment but instead of DHH simply accepting criticism and trying to diffuse the situation, aggravated it and made it far worse and instead of trying to fix the issue, shut it down completely [https://www.theverge.com/2021/4/27/22406673/basecamp-political-speech-policy-controversy https://www.theverge.com/2021/4/27/22406673/basecamp-politic...]
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

agloeregrets 5y ago

You missed a midpoint here, when employees stated that the list could be racist towards people with Asian heritage, the cofounder doubled down on it, claimed that only 10% could be, and well actuallyed it all and then shut down any communication or talk about it. It was crappy management that didn't listen to problems

FemmeAndroid 5y ago
Yup. It was a founder acting instigating and fanning the slightest flames of political disagreement. Your job, even if you disagree with the person your talking to, is to at the very least genuinely acknowledge the persons perspective and try and deescalate. Instead DHH seems to have continually doubled down and made things worse. As the boss, it’s your job to get people back to work. It seems like DHH, more than anyone, was causing the infighting. It wasn’t coworkers talking politics, and fighting amongst themselves, it was a boss handling criticism extremely poorly, and doubling down on defensiveness until he had to mandate his employees shut up, or quit.
- midrus 5y ago
  Thanks for the explanation. It is a difficult situation to understand from the outside tbh. I agree dhh looks like the person that, if you agree with his points of view, everything is awesome. The moment you don't seems you'll have a hard time convincing him otherwise. So I do think the first one that should shut up (at work) ranting about politics is himself, and provide an example for others. I hope from now, with whatever number of employes they end up with, they get back to work.
midrus 5y ago
Sorry, I think that's the right thing to do. And should have been done a lot erlier. Like 10 years ago when the list first started. And I'd also consider firing everyone that contributed names to that list, and that I can find public conversations making fun of people names. I don't care if they are male, white, black or whatever. That doesn't matter. Making fun of peoples names, weight, religion or whatever is wrong. No discussion. You're fired for this. This is the real shameful thing here, from my biased european point of view. This is the intolerable part. Now, shutting these discussions off *from work* is the right thing to do in my opinion. Because they literally have no end, and the company is a business, which needs to build products, which needs to sell, so you have your money. If you spend your day discussing politics, you don't make money. Do you want to discuss politics? Do you really want to discuss these societal problems? I'm all in for it, lets grab a beer at 6am pm at the pub across the street and come up with a solution for these problems. Let's found a political party or an association or whatever we want to do to fix problem. At least here, in europe, the moment you propose to do these things out of work hours, you 1) See 80% lose interest in their principles and prefer to go home and enjoy their kids and 2) You get to meet with the 20% people with the real interest in fixing things for a better world. I insist in my opinion. It is not that these things should not be talked about, dismissed, or whatever. These are important things for the future. It is that your workplace *is not* the place for this.