17 ms·

That thread is hilarious. He went on blast about "the N-word" being used in company communications and so now I know that what got leaked is embarrassing and a

That thread is hilarious. He went on blast about "the N-word" being used in company communications and so now I know that what got leaked is embarrassing and a terrible look. I wouldn't normally care, but now that the CEO has gone and done this I'm gonna be on the look out for the story. As a side note, if this CEO thinks it's okay to toss around "the N-word", then why doesn't he just actually spell it out in Twitter? Or is he just a coward? ;)

artursapek 4y ago
I don't think that's what he is saying, lol
convery 4y ago
Automated TOS takedowns?
smcl 4y ago
Wild that (supposedly) only 20/3200 think using what is basically the ultimate racial slur in English is bad. And that he thinks this is a good thing? Just when I thought my opinion of crypto companies couldn't get any lower ...
- nullc 4y ago
  I think you're interpreting that backwards.
  - smcl 4y ago
    Hmm, I revisited to check and Tweet #1 is: > We recently attempted to summarize what the @krakenfx culture has been over the past 11 years, and what we hope it continues to be. > We had a few heated debates and it turns out we have about 20 people out of 3200 who are totally not on board. Ok so 20/3200 are "totally not on board" - i.e. they're the group of people supposedly causing trouble that we are going to be discussing in this thread. While tweet #5 lists what this group are annoyed about: > 5/ What are they upset about? > * DEI (Silicon Valley's version) > * pronouns, whether someone can identify as a different race and be allowed to use the N-word > * whether differences in human sex exist at all > * being respected and unoffended > * being "harmed" by "violent" words So my overall read is that he's taking aim at "woke" culture, and my initial interpretation of the second item was "that non-black people are using the n-word" which tracks with the overall point. I guess it could be interpreted differently ("if you identify as black [these unhappy people] think you should be able to use the n-word") but that isn't really in line with the rest of the tweet. But my interpretation was, someone's clearly dropping n-bombs and either: 1. only a small minority are vocally upset about it, the rest are ok 2. only a small minority have no qualms with it, the rest are upset And the scare-quotes in 'being "harmed" by "violent" words' kinda look like he's ridiculing this point. Honestly it reads like a tech-bro version of the usual "these liberal snowflakes need a safe space..." rant to me.
- capableweb 4y ago
  I don't think it seems like 20/3200 are saying "Using the N-word is negative", but rather that they are unhappy with the company internals overall. Could be because of that, could because of a lot of reasons, some of them being outlined in the Twitter thread. But to suggest that those people are the ones unhappy with using the N-word and the rest being neutral about it, seems to extrapolate a bit too much from the thread.
GameOfFrowns 4y ago
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
dubswithus 4y ago
From the tweet: > pronouns, whether someone can identify as a different race and be allowed to use the N-word Perhaps his argument is that no one should be able to use it at work? I'm not convinced your take is the correct one.
- bergenty 4y ago
- babypuncher 4y ago
  So he's not saying the N-word himself, but instead arguing that opressed minorities should not be allowed to reclaim slurs formerly used against them? I really do not see how that is much better. The entire statement reeks of privilege.
  - RC_ITR 4y ago
    No. He’s making the troll argument that if people born men can identify as women (and therefore be treated as such) then why can’t white people identify as black and say the n-word. Not as superficially bad as saying the word, but bad in the sense it is a two-for-one: trivializing the experience of black people and trans people.
    - babypuncher 4y ago
      For some reason I find this even worse. What an ass. It's a shittier version of the "trans apache attack helicopter" meme from forever ago.
    - basch 4y ago
      Maybe I am giving him the benefit of the doubt, but I read it as the exact opposite. I read it as him saying: the argument that "why can’t white people identify as black and say the n-word" is a troll argument, made in bad faith, and is disruptive to work culture and productivity, and people making that argument have no place in their culture. I arrive at that conclusion because the heading starts "What are they upset about?" They are upset "whether someone can identify as a different race and be allowed to use the N-word." I dont really think someone parading against wokism would in good faith argue that somebody can identify as a different race. They would only do so facetiously. Three tweets above it, his SYN flood DoS analogy makes its pretty clear he is against people derailing good conversation with in bad faith arguments. As an aside, I'm honestly a little concerned that basically every other commenter arrived at a different conclusion. We are all all over the place. Is our ability to connectively parse tribal language, in a consensual way, really this broken? Is what he wrote really that cryptic or unclear? EDIT: I guess he is the facetious bad actor.
gorwell 4y ago
That's not what he said.
artursapek 4y ago
I've worked at Kraken for almost 6 years, and know Jesse pretty well. He acquired my project and I reported to him for a while. I manage a large engineering team here. I think you and many others are misinterpreting what he wrote. He's not defending the use of the N-word and I've never, ever seen anyone use language remotely close to that in internal communications. I think the example he gave is the ridiculous scenario of someone identifying as a different race so they can have permission to use the N word. I think people are getting outraged over literally nothing with this story, I've found the vast majority of people working at Kraken to be perfectly reasonable and respectful to each other. I don't understand why everyone on HN/Twitter is so eager to get outraged over stories like this when they have so little detail and context.
- idontpost 4y ago
  Well, the poorly written 11 tweet rant doesn't come across as reasonable or respectful. Mostly it comes across as unhinged and cocaine-fueled gibberish. I hope his communication skills aren't this bad in real meetings.
- phphphphp 4y ago
  Have you read the culture document? Do you agree with it? Has anyone you manage chosen to leave because of it?
  - artursapek 4y ago
    I agree with the culture in general but didn't read the document thoroughly because I've been here for so long I know what the culture is. The document was more for recent hires and new candidates.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
ta8903 4y ago

artursapek 4y ago

I don't think that's what he is saying, lol

convery 4y ago

Automated TOS takedowns?

smcl 4y ago

Wild that (supposedly) only 20/3200 think using what is basically the ultimate racial slur in English is bad. And that he thinks this is a good thing? Just when I thought my opinion of crypto companies couldn't get any lower ...

nullc 4y ago
I think you're interpreting that backwards.
- smcl 4y ago
  Hmm, I revisited to check and Tweet #1 is: > We recently attempted to summarize what the @krakenfx culture has been over the past 11 years, and what we hope it continues to be. > We had a few heated debates and it turns out we have about 20 people out of 3200 who are totally not on board. Ok so 20/3200 are "totally not on board" - i.e. they're the group of people supposedly causing trouble that we are going to be discussing in this thread. While tweet #5 lists what this group are annoyed about: > 5/ What are they upset about? > * DEI (Silicon Valley's version) > * pronouns, whether someone can identify as a different race and be allowed to use the N-word > * whether differences in human sex exist at all > * being respected and unoffended > * being "harmed" by "violent" words So my overall read is that he's taking aim at "woke" culture, and my initial interpretation of the second item was "that non-black people are using the n-word" which tracks with the overall point. I guess it could be interpreted differently ("if you identify as black [these unhappy people] think you should be able to use the n-word") but that isn't really in line with the rest of the tweet. But my interpretation was, someone's clearly dropping n-bombs and either: 1. only a small minority are vocally upset about it, the rest are ok 2. only a small minority have no qualms with it, the rest are upset And the scare-quotes in 'being "harmed" by "violent" words' kinda look like he's ridiculing this point. Honestly it reads like a tech-bro version of the usual "these liberal snowflakes need a safe space..." rant to me.
capableweb 4y ago
I don't think it seems like 20/3200 are saying "Using the N-word is negative", but rather that they are unhappy with the company internals overall. Could be because of that, could because of a lot of reasons, some of them being outlined in the Twitter thread. But to suggest that those people are the ones unhappy with using the N-word and the rest being neutral about it, seems to extrapolate a bit too much from the thread.

GameOfFrowns 4y ago

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

dubswithus 4y ago

From the tweet: > pronouns, whether someone can identify as a different race and be allowed to use the N-word Perhaps his argument is that no one should be able to use it at work? I'm not convinced your take is the correct one.

bergenty 4y ago
babypuncher 4y ago
So he's not saying the N-word himself, but instead arguing that opressed minorities should not be allowed to reclaim slurs formerly used against them? I really do not see how that is much better. The entire statement reeks of privilege.
- RC_ITR 4y ago
  No. He’s making the troll argument that if people born men can identify as women (and therefore be treated as such) then why can’t white people identify as black and say the n-word. Not as superficially bad as saying the word, but bad in the sense it is a two-for-one: trivializing the experience of black people and trans people.
  - babypuncher 4y ago
    For some reason I find this even worse. What an ass. It's a shittier version of the "trans apache attack helicopter" meme from forever ago.
  - basch 4y ago
    Maybe I am giving him the benefit of the doubt, but I read it as the exact opposite. I read it as him saying: the argument that "why can’t white people identify as black and say the n-word" is a troll argument, made in bad faith, and is disruptive to work culture and productivity, and people making that argument have no place in their culture. I arrive at that conclusion because the heading starts "What are they upset about?" They are upset "whether someone can identify as a different race and be allowed to use the N-word." I dont really think someone parading against wokism would in good faith argue that somebody can identify as a different race. They would only do so facetiously. Three tweets above it, his SYN flood DoS analogy makes its pretty clear he is against people derailing good conversation with in bad faith arguments. As an aside, I'm honestly a little concerned that basically every other commenter arrived at a different conclusion. We are all all over the place. Is our ability to connectively parse tribal language, in a consensual way, really this broken? Is what he wrote really that cryptic or unclear? EDIT: I guess he is the facetious bad actor.

gorwell 4y ago

That's not what he said.

artursapek 4y ago

I've worked at Kraken for almost 6 years, and know Jesse pretty well. He acquired my project and I reported to him for a while. I manage a large engineering team here. I think you and many others are misinterpreting what he wrote. He's not defending the use of the N-word and I've never, ever seen anyone use language remotely close to that in internal communications. I think the example he gave is the ridiculous scenario of someone identifying as a different race so they can have permission to use the N word. I think people are getting outraged over literally nothing with this story, I've found the vast majority of people working at Kraken to be perfectly reasonable and respectful to each other. I don't understand why everyone on HN/Twitter is so eager to get outraged over stories like this when they have so little detail and context.

idontpost 4y ago
Well, the poorly written 11 tweet rant doesn't come across as reasonable or respectful. Mostly it comes across as unhinged and cocaine-fueled gibberish. I hope his communication skills aren't this bad in real meetings.
phphphphp 4y ago
Have you read the culture document? Do you agree with it? Has anyone you manage chosen to leave because of it?
- artursapek 4y ago
  I agree with the culture in general but didn't read the document thoroughly because I've been here for so long I know what the culture is. The document was more for recent hires and new candidates.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

ta8903 4y ago