5 ms·
1) it's not people, it's a company. They're 2 different things. People have consciences and families. Companies are beholden to shareholders. People can fin
by dmn322 3y ago
1) it's not people, it's a company. They're 2 different things. People have consciences and families. Companies are beholden to shareholders. People can find a different job if their company fails. I don't think we need to be forgiving to companies. They're not forgiving to people. They act on policy.
2) While I admit that I'm guilty of it too, overpromising is pretty destructive. It causes you to have to work harder and give stuff for free to deliver, but that in turn causes other people to have to do that too. If overpromising is very common, then that would mean the market is artificially lower, which is why you have people scrambling all the time doing quick and dirty fixes for everything and lots of companies with horrible work-life balance. It would probably be good for the industry if overpromising were a shameful taboo and not just a simple slipup.
- alexvoda 3y agoGP post regarding 1 is just a manifestation of the illness in the US of considering companies to be people. You should not have empathy for a company.
- barnabee 3y agoThis. No empathy. Companies have no right not to die or be killed. Society doesn’t need to prop up your business model.
- runlaszlorun 3y agoA little while back I went looking online to find the origins of “a corporation is a person”. I’m no lawyer… so feel free to correct me if anyone is… but it looked like the origins of a “corporation is a person” came from simple administrative needs. That it would be unrealistic to make someone indivdually sue each shareholder separately instead od bundling them into one suit and treating the corporation as “one person”. Sure seems like we’ve lost the plot then. In addition to the situations pointed to above, a corporation doesn’t sign up for the military draft, get taxed on their gross income, pay social security, do jury duty, vote in election, etc, etc, etc.
- scrollaway 3y agoIn Belgium administration for example, you usually call a company a “moral person” (as opposed to a “physical person” for humans). This is used to know who is the “person” on the end of various contracts, tax filings, ownerships etc
- eduction 3y agoThat’s fine, you don’t have to love a corp like they’re a human, or empathize, but they’re definitely going to screw up in a human way because they’re made of humans, so customers are going to be disappointed if they expect too much. The earlier comment called ending free lifetime updates/service “incredibly scummy behavior.” That seems way off to me. In the pantheon of bad corporate behavior that’s not even a 1 out of 10 in severity. It’s “disappointing behavior” but not surprising or IMO particularly bad. None of us is entitled to free service from others. That’s just not how the world works long term. Nice if you can get it but don’t be surprised when it ends. By the way I think you’re right that it’s destructive behavior - one company does this, competitors face pressure to do the same. But I am not sure acting like it’s a shameful moral outrage to overpromise is a good solution. The problem isn’t morality, it’s bad incentives, with “10X or bust” VC thinking at the root. I don’t hate the players I hate the game.
- dmn322 3y agoI don't think they screw up in human ways though. That's not a human way. A human freelancer or friend wouldn't get away with just ghosting like that after promising something. They would have to own up and face the music. They screwed up in an institutional way: by changing policy when it suited them, and trying to cover their tracks.
- Osiris 3y agoWhat? Humans get away with crap like this all the time. You’ve never had a friend promise to show up to something and then not show up? Or promise to return a tool after borrowing it and not do it? Or a freelance contractor/handyman only do half a job?
- dmn322 3y agoI agree that there are much worse ways that corporations can be scummy. This is pretty low on the list of priorities compared to environmental destruction, funding warlords, etc. Also, I agree that people don't have a right to infinite free labor. And as for human flakiness... yes it's there. It feels different somehow but I can't put my finger on it. The last example feels most relevant... the contractor finishing half a job. That would be considered pretty shady, and I think for good reason.
- duckmysick 3y agoRegarding the first point: you're right in the context of large corporations (such as Mattermost). We also have sole proprietorships, which are strongly tied to the owner.
- dmn322 3y agoTrue, and even in the case of larger corporations, they can act with a little humanity when they have a strong leader with lots of leeway.. but then they don't get the scaling benefits of relying on systematic policy and can make more errors.