> Wow. This blog post is unbelievably condescending and arrogant. I really don't think it is. The author simply seems to have very little tolerance for that on

> Wow. This blog post is unbelievably condescending and arrogant. I really don't think it is. The author simply seems to have very little tolerance for that onboarding process, and do you know what, that process actually does sound pretty familiar. I've worked for two companies that give you their hardware, install a ton of trash on it, have a total mess of SSO logins that kind of work or require the use of multiple different accounts for certain services that "were set up with SSO but didn't work..." And one also had a series of daft orientation tasks that were supposed to promote team work and establish the company's culture, but in fact are just a waste of time that no one wants to do -- with the sole exception of the suspiciously hyper lunatic running the team building session. Look at the article title. Red flags. Stuff like this might very well indicate that maybe, maybe this company's culture is not a good fit if you have low tolerance for amateurs. > Putting people on the spot and humiliate them The author was put on the spot, brought into a whatever meeting, and asked a question, to which they responded honestly and without embellishment of the truth. So... should the author have lied? They simply replied they did not have a desk. I sure as shit wouldn't lie to cover my manager's ass because, frankly, I'd want a desk. If the manager felt humiliated, it will have come from within, because you know what, they should feel embarrassed if they've taken on a new worker and not gotten them somewhere to work. > It's _your_ company now, go help improve it! No. It's the shareholders' company, they can make sure their employees are properly equipped and appropriately paid to do their jobs, then the good work will follow. As for suggesting that their onboarding process could use improvement, 9/10 managers who receive that feedback will smile, say what a good idea that is, say they'll take it on board, and then never think about it again. I've been a manager, and I've been a developer. Most managers don't give a toss. The article, at least the way I'm seeing it, seems to be a satirical (i.e. intended for an audience that has a common frame of reference and, more importantly, a sense of humour) account of an onboarding process at a company that later turned out to be a bad fit. And in hindsight, the author is saying that they probably indeed should have seen the red flags from the start as being indicative of whatever would cause their departure. > You are making everybody else's life miserable without contributing anything positive or helping to improve anything. That's a stretch. The only person the author has made miserable is you, but why this has stirred such an awkwardly emotive response from you, I don't know.