5 ms·

> "don't use terms like 'market share' in internal communications" Sounds like the training was teaching you how to avoid leaving an audit trail rather than ho

> "don't use terms like 'market share' in internal communications" Sounds like the training was teaching you how to avoid leaving an audit trail rather than how to prevent illegal activity.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
luckydata 5y ago
duh, what do you think training is for?
- zarmin 5y ago
  - kylebyproxy 5y ago
    Huh. I always thought it was for the conductors. This changes everything.
  - dang 5y ago
    Could you please stop posting unsubstantive comments to HN? You've done it a lot, unfortunately. We ban accounts that do that, because we're trying for a different quality of discussion here. I don't want to ban you, so if you wouldn't mind reviewing https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and taking the intended spirit of the site more to heart, we'd be grateful.
DannyBee 5y ago
Can we please kill this trope? it is because humans use terms colloquially rather than with the utmost precision, and then it gets held up as if the person meant the exact precise legal concept. This is true always, which is why the advice this person got is also commonly given in lots of forms. For example, doctors are often trained in being careful in what they write down for the same reason. The audit trail is always there no matter what, and this wouldn't change that
- bytelines 5y ago
  > This is true always, which is why the advice this person got is also commonly given in lots of forms. For example, doctors are often trained in being careful in what they write down for the same reason. Alternative take: it is indeed for the same reason - to avoid incriminating yourself. You carry assumption that the behavior is not incriminating. Doctors do commit in malpractice. Companies do engage in monopolistic behavior. If such training were strictly to avoid illegal behavior, wouldn't it be better to train people in what the precise legal concept is, so that they can comply with the law? Or is behaving within the law a secondary concern. In this case Amazon quite literally got caught by the AG of Washington state for breaking the exact laws their training tells them they shouldn't talk about. Why are you defending this?
  - 8ytecoder 5y ago
    Not to defend corporations, but they do. It’s repeatedly drilled down in you to reach out to the legal dept. That said companies care a lot about the legality of things and not necessarily the morality. And they hire people who would “get things done”. Consequently converting the legal training to “how to avoid to getting caught” training.
    - geoduck14 5y ago
      >That said companies care a lot about the legality of things and not necessarily the morality. I worked for a fortune 100 company. We are humans, and our customers are humans. We absolutely have morals - at an individual level, and those morals influence how we work
      - kfarr 5y ago
        Morals don’t matter when the shareholders sue board members for failing to uphold fiduciary responsibility. Just saying, the law influences how we work
        anticensor 5y ago

> "don't use terms like 'market share' in internal communications" Sounds like the training was teaching you how to avoid leaving an audit trail rather than how to prevent illegal activity.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

luckydata 5y ago

duh, what do you think training is for?

zarmin 5y ago
- kylebyproxy 5y ago
  Huh. I always thought it was for the conductors. This changes everything.
- dang 5y ago
  Could you please stop posting unsubstantive comments to HN? You've done it a lot, unfortunately. We ban accounts that do that, because we're trying for a different quality of discussion here. I don't want to ban you, so if you wouldn't mind reviewing https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and taking the intended spirit of the site more to heart, we'd be grateful.

DannyBee 5y ago

Can we please kill this trope? it is because humans use terms colloquially rather than with the utmost precision, and then it gets held up as if the person meant the exact precise legal concept. This is true always, which is why the advice this person got is also commonly given in lots of forms. For example, doctors are often trained in being careful in what they write down for the same reason. The audit trail is always there no matter what, and this wouldn't change that

bytelines 5y ago
> This is true always, which is why the advice this person got is also commonly given in lots of forms. For example, doctors are often trained in being careful in what they write down for the same reason. Alternative take: it is indeed for the same reason - to avoid incriminating yourself. You carry assumption that the behavior is not incriminating. Doctors do commit in malpractice. Companies do engage in monopolistic behavior. If such training were strictly to avoid illegal behavior, wouldn't it be better to train people in what the precise legal concept is, so that they can comply with the law? Or is behaving within the law a secondary concern. In this case Amazon quite literally got caught by the AG of Washington state for breaking the exact laws their training tells them they shouldn't talk about. Why are you defending this?
- 8ytecoder 5y ago
  Not to defend corporations, but they do. It’s repeatedly drilled down in you to reach out to the legal dept. That said companies care a lot about the legality of things and not necessarily the morality. And they hire people who would “get things done”. Consequently converting the legal training to “how to avoid to getting caught” training.
  - geoduck14 5y ago
    >That said companies care a lot about the legality of things and not necessarily the morality. I worked for a fortune 100 company. We are humans, and our customers are humans. We absolutely have morals - at an individual level, and those morals influence how we work
    - kfarr 5y ago
      Morals don’t matter when the shareholders sue board members for failing to uphold fiduciary responsibility. Just saying, the law influences how we work
      - anticensor 5y ago