3 ms·
I think you are broadly correct. However, recall Elon's takeover of Twitter was all about "free speech" so in my opinion it's a bad look. A "bigger man" would s
by runamok 4y ago
I think you are broadly correct. However, recall Elon's takeover of Twitter was all about "free speech" so in my opinion it's a bad look. A "bigger man" would say "put some time on my calendar and I'd love to hear more". I value flat hierarchy companies where you don't just blindly kowtow to your leaders.
- jerf 4y agoIf you think this is about "kowtowing", you're still totally in the wrong headspace and completely fail to understand the situation. Elon basically can't not fire the guy. It wasn't even an option, so criticizing him for failing to take the non-option is missing the point. It wouldn't have been an option for Jack, it wouldn't have been an option for any other CEO. You don't get license to speak publicly for the company just because you don't like the CEO. If anything, sorry to the HN gestalt, this is a prime example of just how out-of-touch with reality Silicon Valley liberals have become, that they are so secure that they will be protected because they have the "right opinions" or hate the "right people" that they be surprised that they are fired for mouthing off in public at the company CEO. So disconnect from reality that they have a 180 degree wrong read of the situation. And this is not special. It is completely and utterly a mundane fact of life. This person isn't being specially persecuted by the horribleevilElon. This person is just living a normal life the rest of us live, and as I said, there are indeed good and sensible reasons people live this way. Anyone who is just shocked, shocked by this firing is very out of touch with the entire rest of the world, and I'm trying to help at least a fraction of such people reconnect with reality before this bites them personally.
- themacguffinman 4y agoThis is a pretty context-free take on the matter. Elon Musk effectively slandered the engineers on the team with incorrect technical statements that implied they were incompetent. He told all future employers that the engs from Twitter did something stupid that they didn't actually do. It might make sense for the company to fire employees for public corrections, but it also makes sense for the employees to correct these lies for their long term career prospects. This entire scenario was created by Elon Musk. Your context-free take implies that the employees damaged the company unnecessarily when it was a reasonable reaction to targeted slander. Avoiding the liability of this public correction was easy, none of these employees were new, what was new was Elon's unprovoked slander. Maybe if you don't want the legal liability of an employee saying things that might be ammunition, don't do it to them first. If you want to know what happens when this kind of slander goes unchecked, look up Mick Gordon. On top of his professional reputation being muddied, he received harassment and death threats over a company's false allegation that he was responsible for the incompetent failure of the Doom Eternal soundtrack.