5 ms·

This author, Casey Newton, seems to be trying to push a narrative that Basecamp damaged itself by banning politics at work. But the anecdotes in here convince m

This author, Casey Newton, seems to be trying to push a narrative that Basecamp damaged itself by banning politics at work. But the anecdotes in here convince me that Basecamp did the right thing. The people involved in this exchange with Singer seem unhinged - demanding that someone declare that white supremacy exists at work? This type of cultish demand-oriented discourse is unacceptable in professional organizations and even the rest of society. It creates an unnecessarily hostile workplace, and the lack of nuance in their stances really just shows a lack of mental balance or ability to deal with any differences of opinions. Let’s be honest - the diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) committees that have appeared in companies and governments all over are simply a Trojan horse for far left progressive politics, and a vehicle to take over an institution by making a particular political ideology the official religion of that organization. DEI groups and policies usually serve to prevent any actual diversity, labeling dissenting thought as racist and coating their own racist policies (for example race or gender based hiring/promotion) in vague terms like “justice”. Usually those participating in DEI efforts are so distracted by it that they add no actual value to the business, and I’m sure the third of the company that joined that group at Basecamp were no different. I’m betting Basecamp will pull through just fine without such toxic employees, and am glad to see companies like Basecamp and Coinbase take steps to keep from having their workplace and company weaponized by activists to serve divisive ideological purposes that have nothing to do with the company’s business.

abxytg 6y ago
"demanding that someone declare that white supremacy exists at work" I would just love if you could point out this interaction to us. You have wildly mischaracterized it lmao.
- x3n0ph3n3 6y ago
  Not the person you replied to, but this was a direct quote: > “The fact that you can be a white male, and come to this meeting and call people racist and say ‘white supremacy doesn't exist’ when it's blatant at this company is white privilege,” the employee said. “The fact that he wasn’t corrected and was in fact thanked — it makes me sick.” Isn't this employee declaring that "white supremacy" is "blatant at this company" ? His reaction that such "white supremacy" and "white privilege" "wasn't corrected" made him "sick." It's albeit not a direct demand that Ryan Singer be called out as a white supremacist, but it does seem to both imply it and express a strong grievance that it was not called out or corrected. Maybe you have a different interpretation of this?
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - chris11 6y ago
    I don't know what was said at the meeting. But Singer did start making comments about white supremacy in America at a meeting about banning political discussion at Basecamp. I could see how it looked like his opinions were given more respect than others. If he made statements about white supremacy not existing at basecamp, then that was a horrible defense to accusations of white privilege at Basecamp. Shutting down discussions over arguments about phrasing makes it looks like Basecamp would prefer just to ignore issues with discrimination if they did exist.
    - x3n0ph3n3 6y ago
      > I don't know what was said at the meeting. But Singer did start making comments about white supremacy in America at a meeting about banning political discussion at Basecamp I'm sorry, but do you or do you not know what was said at the meeting? Those two statements contradict each other, unless you're talking about two different meetings. I quoted something provided by an employee who was there, at the meeting that this article is about.
      - chris11 6y ago
        Singer was quoted as saying “I strongly disagree we live in a white supremacist culture,”. Your quote implied that Singer was making comments about white supremacy, and Singer's reply to Casey Newton primarily focused on white supremacy in America. I wasn't at the meeting, and it sounds like it was extremely charged. I don't think I can make nuanced comments about what was said there. But it seems clear that Singer made comments minimizing white supremacy in America, even his emailed reply does.
vore 6y ago
This dismissal of people as "unhinged", "cultish", and "lack of mental balance" at best unsympathetic and at worst callous. As others have pointed out, it's not really possible to compartmentalize yourself from "politics" unless you are represented by the majority and what is and isn't "politically acceptable" at work has always been fluid and changing. The fact that they have chosen these words to describe their frustration does not create "an unnecessarily hostile workplace" if they were already experiencing one (which, if you remember, may have something to do with the "Best Names List", and the fact that DHH spent a long blog post detailing how there were "only" a few Asian names on there was completely downplaying the fact they were still making fun of names from other races!).
- moduspol 6y ago
  It blows my mind that we're now so far down the list of transgressions that "list of funny sounding names poorly handled by management" is being touted as some egregious sin justifying claims of white supremacy at the company. It was a bad idea and it wasn't handled well. But geesh.
  - XorNot 6y ago
    So you just missed that whole section which starts with - unprompted - the Head of Strategy deciding to go on a long rant about their own political views in a company meeting? Like it really doesn't matter what led to that meeting, because I've not seen a version of events where somehow that becomes not a disaster on your "so anyway we announced a policy about you in a blog post where we insulted a whole lot of you recently..." meeting.
    - moduspol 6y ago
      Those things all came after. The only justification for the DE&I committee is this list. The only other evidence of white supremacy is (lol) one guy saying he doesn't think it's there in the company. Usually there'll be at least a claim of someone using the N-word, or employees of different races being treated unfairly. We can't even get that! This list existed, and was not handled well by management, and that's enough to accept that simply claiming the company is not white supremacist is too political. Oh but the guy did share a Breitbart link once, I think, so the whole company was basically a half step away from burning crosses on lawns. Give me a break.
seriousquestion 6y ago
Here's a twitch partner, just earlier today, illustrating how DEI is racist. Expect to see a lot of this; "Kinda sad, found out I was accepted into a twitch team because of my skin colour so that “diversity” can be preached & not for my values or the blood, sweat n tears I’ve put into my work. Plus then being left out of everything & watching from the sidelines continuously..." https://twitter.com/Sharesee/status/1389522366515056641 https://twitter.com/Sharesee/status/1389522366515056641
- gowld 6y ago
  It's weird to cite someone complaining about not being included, as an example of inclusion being bad. Sure, fake-DEI is bad, because it's not DEI! Also weird for someone to complain about "because of my skin colour" when she identifies herself on Twitter as "Bajan and British" first and foremost, not anything about her "values or the blood, sweat n tears".
  - jiofih 6y ago
    Its actually a lot weirder for you to start questioning their ethnicity. The parent didn’t say inclusion is bad, but the execution of DEI policies is bad.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
dools 6y ago
Tucker? Is that you behind the throwaway?
nsonha 6y ago
anytime anyone mentions "left" or "right" in their argument, I couldn't help but thinking the person is now short or actual argument and need to resort to name calling. And it's not just those 2 words, things like assigning people/practices a bunch of adjectives/nouns without elaboration too, that's a pattern very obvious to detect and can discredit your argument really quickly.

abxytg 6y ago

"demanding that someone declare that white supremacy exists at work" I would just love if you could point out this interaction to us. You have wildly mischaracterized it lmao.

x3n0ph3n3 6y ago
Not the person you replied to, but this was a direct quote: > “The fact that you can be a white male, and come to this meeting and call people racist and say ‘white supremacy doesn't exist’ when it's blatant at this company is white privilege,” the employee said. “The fact that he wasn’t corrected and was in fact thanked — it makes me sick.” Isn't this employee declaring that "white supremacy" is "blatant at this company" ? His reaction that such "white supremacy" and "white privilege" "wasn't corrected" made him "sick." It's albeit not a direct demand that Ryan Singer be called out as a white supremacist, but it does seem to both imply it and express a strong grievance that it was not called out or corrected. Maybe you have a different interpretation of this?
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- chris11 6y ago
  I don't know what was said at the meeting. But Singer did start making comments about white supremacy in America at a meeting about banning political discussion at Basecamp. I could see how it looked like his opinions were given more respect than others. If he made statements about white supremacy not existing at basecamp, then that was a horrible defense to accusations of white privilege at Basecamp. Shutting down discussions over arguments about phrasing makes it looks like Basecamp would prefer just to ignore issues with discrimination if they did exist.
  - x3n0ph3n3 6y ago
    > I don't know what was said at the meeting. But Singer did start making comments about white supremacy in America at a meeting about banning political discussion at Basecamp I'm sorry, but do you or do you not know what was said at the meeting? Those two statements contradict each other, unless you're talking about two different meetings. I quoted something provided by an employee who was there, at the meeting that this article is about.
    - chris11 6y ago
      Singer was quoted as saying “I strongly disagree we live in a white supremacist culture,”. Your quote implied that Singer was making comments about white supremacy, and Singer's reply to Casey Newton primarily focused on white supremacy in America. I wasn't at the meeting, and it sounds like it was extremely charged. I don't think I can make nuanced comments about what was said there. But it seems clear that Singer made comments minimizing white supremacy in America, even his emailed reply does.

vore 6y ago

This dismissal of people as "unhinged", "cultish", and "lack of mental balance" at best unsympathetic and at worst callous. As others have pointed out, it's not really possible to compartmentalize yourself from "politics" unless you are represented by the majority and what is and isn't "politically acceptable" at work has always been fluid and changing. The fact that they have chosen these words to describe their frustration does not create "an unnecessarily hostile workplace" if they were already experiencing one (which, if you remember, may have something to do with the "Best Names List", and the fact that DHH spent a long blog post detailing how there were "only" a few Asian names on there was completely downplaying the fact they were still making fun of names from other races!).

moduspol 6y ago
It blows my mind that we're now so far down the list of transgressions that "list of funny sounding names poorly handled by management" is being touted as some egregious sin justifying claims of white supremacy at the company. It was a bad idea and it wasn't handled well. But geesh.
- XorNot 6y ago
  So you just missed that whole section which starts with - unprompted - the Head of Strategy deciding to go on a long rant about their own political views in a company meeting? Like it really doesn't matter what led to that meeting, because I've not seen a version of events where somehow that becomes not a disaster on your "so anyway we announced a policy about you in a blog post where we insulted a whole lot of you recently..." meeting.
  - moduspol 6y ago
    Those things all came after. The only justification for the DE&I committee is this list. The only other evidence of white supremacy is (lol) one guy saying he doesn't think it's there in the company. Usually there'll be at least a claim of someone using the N-word, or employees of different races being treated unfairly. We can't even get that! This list existed, and was not handled well by management, and that's enough to accept that simply claiming the company is not white supremacist is too political. Oh but the guy did share a Breitbart link once, I think, so the whole company was basically a half step away from burning crosses on lawns. Give me a break.

seriousquestion 6y ago

Here's a twitch partner, just earlier today, illustrating how DEI is racist. Expect to see a lot of this; "Kinda sad, found out I was accepted into a twitch team because of my skin colour so that “diversity” can be preached & not for my values or the blood, sweat n tears I’ve put into my work. Plus then being left out of everything & watching from the sidelines continuously..." https://twitter.com/Sharesee/status/1389522366515056641 https://twitter.com/Sharesee/status/1389522366515056641

gowld 6y ago
It's weird to cite someone complaining about not being included, as an example of inclusion being bad. Sure, fake-DEI is bad, because it's not DEI! Also weird for someone to complain about "because of my skin colour" when she identifies herself on Twitter as "Bajan and British" first and foremost, not anything about her "values or the blood, sweat n tears".
- jiofih 6y ago
  Its actually a lot weirder for you to start questioning their ethnicity. The parent didn’t say inclusion is bad, but the execution of DEI policies is bad.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]

dools 6y ago

Tucker? Is that you behind the throwaway?

nsonha 6y ago

anytime anyone mentions "left" or "right" in their argument, I couldn't help but thinking the person is now short or actual argument and need to resort to name calling. And it's not just those 2 words, things like assigning people/practices a bunch of adjectives/nouns without elaboration too, that's a pattern very obvious to detect and can discredit your argument really quickly.