3 ms·

You don't need anyone's approval to decide to call yourself a "senior" developer (even if nobody else agrees). Just like with founders: the market is the ultim

You don't need anyone's approval to decide to call yourself a "senior" developer (even if nobody else agrees). Just like with founders: the market is the ultimate arbiter. If you call yourself a senior developer, but can't perform as one, the market will correct your misconception—just like it knocks down incorrect founders. OP is the one obsesses with hierarchy. The part that's ridiculous is to claim that the founders of successful companies haven't earned their position. Charity has absolutely demonstrated a lot of merit to get Honeycomb to where it is.

lapcat 3y ago
> Just like with founders: the market is the ultimate arbiter. > The part that's ridiculous is to claim that the founders of successful companies haven't earned their position. "The market is the ultimate arbiter" is the exact opposite of the idea that you need the perfect résumé and experience to get and do the job. That's what you seem to be misinterpreting about my comments. A retroactive assessment of someone's tenure in a leadership position is fundamentally different from a promotion to a leadership position, where the assessment necessarily comes before the tenure. > Building a company from scratch is way more work than climbing a corporate hierarchy. There's no reason to believe that this is true, other than the meritocratic article of faith that the most money and power always go to the people who work the "hardest", whatever that means. (I think that scrubbing toilets is hard work.)
- morgante 3y ago
  > There's no reason to believe that this is true, other than the meritocratic article of faith that the most money and power always go to the people who work the "hardest", whatever that means. And the observations of ~everyone who has done both. I've done both and starting a company is way harder.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  - lapcat 3y ago
    Again, I've started a company, contrary to your previous assumption, and I know other people who have started companies. You don't speak for everyone or even most people. If climbing the corporate hierarchy is so much easier, then how high up the ladder did you get exactly?
    - morgante 3y ago
      I never said you hadn't started a company. I explicitly asked if you had—the opposite of assuming. Nothing in my comment assumed you hadn't. Since you're unwilling to argue in good faith, we can resolve this.
      - lapcat 3y ago
        > I explicitly asked if you had—the opposite of assuming. It felt like a rhetorical question, because without waiting for my answer, you presumed to explain to me, "Building a company from scratch is way more work than climbing a corporate hierarchy", and then you doubled down, presuming to know "the observations of ~everyone". What exactly was the purpose of your question, and what is your response to the answer "Yes"?
      - hitekker 3y ago
        You didn't read his top-level comment about where he said he started a company, so it's actually you who aren't arguing in good faith.
        morgante 3y ago
        "I automatically become CEO, CTO, etc., by starting my own company" is phrased like a hypothetical, not as a past tense action. I'd expect a founder to say they became CEO.

lapcat 3y ago

> Just like with founders: the market is the ultimate arbiter. > The part that's ridiculous is to claim that the founders of successful companies haven't earned their position. "The market is the ultimate arbiter" is the exact opposite of the idea that you need the perfect résumé and experience to get and do the job. That's what you seem to be misinterpreting about my comments. A retroactive assessment of someone's tenure in a leadership position is fundamentally different from a promotion to a leadership position, where the assessment necessarily comes before the tenure. > Building a company from scratch is way more work than climbing a corporate hierarchy. There's no reason to believe that this is true, other than the meritocratic article of faith that the most money and power always go to the people who work the "hardest", whatever that means. (I think that scrubbing toilets is hard work.)

morgante 3y ago
> There's no reason to believe that this is true, other than the meritocratic article of faith that the most money and power always go to the people who work the "hardest", whatever that means. And the observations of ~everyone who has done both. I've done both and starting a company is way harder.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- lapcat 3y ago
  Again, I've started a company, contrary to your previous assumption, and I know other people who have started companies. You don't speak for everyone or even most people. If climbing the corporate hierarchy is so much easier, then how high up the ladder did you get exactly?
  - morgante 3y ago
    I never said you hadn't started a company. I explicitly asked if you had—the opposite of assuming. Nothing in my comment assumed you hadn't. Since you're unwilling to argue in good faith, we can resolve this.
    - lapcat 3y ago
      > I explicitly asked if you had—the opposite of assuming. It felt like a rhetorical question, because without waiting for my answer, you presumed to explain to me, "Building a company from scratch is way more work than climbing a corporate hierarchy", and then you doubled down, presuming to know "the observations of ~everyone". What exactly was the purpose of your question, and what is your response to the answer "Yes"?
    - hitekker 3y ago
      You didn't read his top-level comment about where he said he started a company, so it's actually you who aren't arguing in good faith.
      - morgante 3y ago
        "I automatically become CEO, CTO, etc., by starting my own company" is phrased like a hypothetical, not as a past tense action. I'd expect a founder to say they became CEO.