6 ms·

He's paraphrased 2pac is his alcohol fuelled moment "Fuck Mobb Deep, fuck Biggie Fuck Bad Boy as a staff, record label and as a motherfuckin' crew And if you w

He's paraphrased 2pac is his alcohol fuelled moment "Fuck Mobb Deep, fuck Biggie Fuck Bad Boy as a staff, record label and as a motherfuckin' crew And if you want to be down with Bad Bo, then fuck you too Chino XL, fuck you too All you motherfuckers, fuck you too (take money, take money) All of y'all motherfuckers, fuck you, die slow, motherfucker" It's immature and poor judgement but he's apologised for it so I don't think it's fair to drag him down.

littlestymaar 3y ago
> It's immature and poor judgement Which is enough to make him unfit for the position at YC and justifies his resignation. Walmart cashiers are being fired everyday for things like immaturity and poor judgment, why should YC CEO be held under lower behavior standards than blue collar workers?!
- dspillett 3y ago
  To put it in a bit more context: this was out-of-hours, and those Walmart cashiers shouldn't be sacked for immaturity and poor judgement in their personal lives if their work is life is up to scratch. I know it is more complicated than that when your actions have wider reach, especially for someone as high up as a CEO, but for all of us these days with ubiquitous social media potentially giving us all more reach, as what you do in your off-time can negatively impact the company, and your position can lead to your stupid moments having far more impact on people generally. Even a grade A class 1 drunken cockup, in personal time, shouldn't result in a firing unless it is part of a larger or repeating pattern. IMO: he has taken ownership of his actions, accepted that they were stupid, apologies for causing office (and not in the “sorry you found it offensive” non-apology sort of way), etc, so : ridicule him by all means, but sacking seems OTT at this point. And if he does it, or something else similarly foolish, again, then we break out the pitchforks.
  - littlestymaar 3y ago
    > this was out-of-hours There's no out-of-hours for CEO. He was using is official Twitter account to make a public statement, that's a work-related mistake. (It's not like he used some anonymous account to troll on some subreddit) > Walmart cashiers shouldn't be sacked for immaturity and poor judgement in their personal lives if their work is life is up to scratch. I don't know if they should, but they definitely are. Musk's obsession with his employees drug use out of work is an example (and also an example of double standards between CEOs and blue collar workers).
    - cqqxo4zV46cp 3y ago
      I agree that this guy is a tosser. I’m always first in line to give a fatcat tech bro what for. But you’re completely barking up the wrong tree with this tribalist argument. You’re holding him to a standard that you at least in part don’t believe in, but are simply saying “an eye for an eye!” when he wasn’t even the one responsible for taking the first eye. Chill.
      - foldr 3y ago
        They may think that it's reasonable to hold tech CEOs to higher standards in this respect than Walmart cashiers. So I don't think there's necessarily any inconsistency here.
      - johnnyanmac 3y ago
        >You’re holding him to a standard that you at least in part don’t believe in In part. but CEOs have a lot more money and PR on the line than some WalMart worker who may not even be recognized by regular shoppers at that store. And yes, some of it is spite. We're in a period of time where the economy is crashing and such C level execs will drop thousands of jobs at the drop of a hat, for people who did nothing wrong and probably made the company millions, billions. I don't really sympathize when suddenly they screw up on their own volition and may be given the sack themselves.
    - dspillett 3y ago
      > There's no out-of-hours for CEO. Unless his contract specifically says that, bull. If his contract foes specifically say that, then I doubt it is legally enforceable anyway. > He was using is official Twitter account to make a public statement, that's a work-related mistake. If he used an official work account, then yes that paints a different picture and is a more clear-cut case of abusing resources and directly bringing the company into disrepute. But @GarryTan doesn't sound like a company account to me (I'm assuming the 陈嘉兴 in the account display name “Garry Tan 陈嘉兴” is also personal name information, not company affiliation, please correct me if I'm wrong). > I don't know if they should, but they definitely are. Calling for the bad side of a double-standard to apply to all is not the way I'd choose to fix the situation. -- Of course the people threatened by the ill-advised quotes, which might indicate overly string views, are well within their rights to pursue legal action against as they see fit, but at this point I'd say it isn't a sacking matter for the company.
- chiefalchemist 3y ago
  Note: This is a general comment and not intended forgive or incriminate anyone. Perhaps. The thing is, if we only look for leaders who have never erred (read: never fallen and gotten up) we end up with (for example) our "representatives" in Washington DC. That is, generally spineless, middle of the road, etc. The word beige comes to mind. That is, we end up with "leaders" without the toolbox of experiences necessary for effective leadership. Humans? Humans *by definition* make mistakes. Sure some are worse than others. Some demand some mistakes be paid for (in a number of socially acceptable ways). That said, one (rant) is not a pattern. The question is: What are our collective priorities? Human leaders capable of leading humans? Or perfection which effectively translates to no edges, risk adverse, and ultimately flacid and unfollowable?
  - littlestymaar 3y ago
    [flagged]
    - chiefalchemist 3y ago
      [flagged]
      - littlestymaar 3y ago
        [flagged]
  - johnnyanmac 3y ago
    >What are our collective priorities? Human leaders capable of leading humans? Or perfection which effectively translates to no edges, risk adverse, and ultimately flacid and unfollowable? Sure, I'd take humans leading humans. Probably is we're in an era of humans trying to exploit other humans to appeal to semi-human stock market dynamics (likely funded by rich humans who have much better financial security). I want empathy, and representation of the people's needs. Not some infeasible goal to keep growing profits even amidst a potential recession. I don't know Tan that well, but nothing in the conversation I've read over the past few days has even mentioned him being like that. I don't necessarily have any vested interests here, but I definitely don't have sympathy.
- refurb 3y ago
  If being immature and showing poor judgement means you can run a VC fund 100% of VC funds would be firing their CEOs. Thats a ridiculous position to say he’s unfit. But I get it. He’s threading the political establishment so they’ll make hay with this to tear down an opponent. It’s politics.
  - MomoXenosaga 3y ago
    Yes it's politics and working with computers and man-children all day is poor training. Stick to your lane tech billionaires you couldn't win an election if you were the last person alive.
  - chomskyole 3y ago
    From grandparent: > Walmart cashiers are being fired everyday for things like immaturity and poor judgment, why should YC CEO be held under lower behavior standards than blue collar workers?! Parent: >> If being immature and showing poor judgement means you can run a VC fund 100% of VC funds would be firing their CEOs. USA, USA????
hef19898 3y ago
The higher up you are, and the more you represent an organisation, the less immature behavior or poor judgement you cannafford orbare entitled to. USN nuclear sub commanders get replaced for DUIs, because poor judgement is not acceptable. Creating public outrage with drunk rantabon social media falling back on an employer is nothing a normal employee woild get waway woth, let alone a CEO. But in a world where everyone seems to think they are Elon Musk, and not Steve Jobs anymore, it is no surprise this behavior is shickingly common. No, CEO and other public figures from a company should be held to even higher standards than the rank and file.
- hindsightbias 3y ago
  Think about the industry and the people you'd want to be managing an AGI. These people aren't Chuck Forbin.
jwmoz 3y ago
Heinous cringe.
- Cthulhu_ 3y ago
  The cringe is the real crime here.
rsynnott 3y ago
> but he's apologised for it so I don't think it's fair to drag him down. So, the way this works is, he can say whatever he likes, but people shouldn't say mean things about him? How does this work? I'm genuinely curious; this, on the face of it, makes no sense to me at all. Is it because he's rich? I don't get it.
- refurb 3y ago
  Yes, when people apologize for things we generally move on since the person acknowledge their error. Let’s be honest, it’s blowing up because the California political machine is threatened by this guy, and tearing him down for a small transgression means they’ll hold onto the reins of power even longer.
  - chomskyole 3y ago
    A death threat by one of the richest persons = A small transgression when they apologise after the fact Seriously?
    - refurb 3y ago
      Nobody would seriously take that as a death threat. No one. But if you’re a politician, it makes sense to claim you “fear for your life”. Like I said, they want to get rid of this guy since he’s a political opponent.
    - framapotari 3y ago
      If I say to you "die slow", would you read it as me threatening to murder you?
      - deleted 3y ago
        [deleted]
      - kyleamazza 3y ago
        Are you implying that it's not a threat of any kind? Regardless of how it's enacted? I would certainly rather be threatened with a nice day. Especially in this climate, where the tip of a hat causes anonymous people to pile on and send threats via mail, it wouldn't be as simple as brushing it off. The worst part isn't usually the initial threat, it's the piling on afterwards that can last for months and years afterwards.
Brian_K_White 3y ago
Somehow in all my many alcohol fuelled moments, I never said anything like that. Fuck this odious turd and anyone who would try to excuse him.
- zoklet-enjoyer 3y ago
  "Fuck this odious turd and anyone who would try to excuse him." I think what you mean to say was: Fuck Y Combinator as a staff, message board, and as a mother fucking VC group. And if you want to be down with Y Combinator, then fuck you too. Sam Altman, fuck you too.
  - mindcrime 3y ago
    The birth of a new musical genre - "VC rap" - is happening right in front of our eyes!
stefantalpalaru 3y ago
[dead]
JohnFen 3y ago
That he was drunk makes it very likely that he was expressing what he really thinks. It's not a matter of "dragging him down" as much as "when someone shows you who they are, believe them." Apologizing is great, but it can't make people unlearn something they learned about the person.

littlestymaar 3y ago

> It's immature and poor judgement Which is enough to make him unfit for the position at YC and justifies his resignation. Walmart cashiers are being fired everyday for things like immaturity and poor judgment, why should YC CEO be held under lower behavior standards than blue collar workers?!

dspillett 3y ago
To put it in a bit more context: this was out-of-hours, and those Walmart cashiers shouldn't be sacked for immaturity and poor judgement in their personal lives if their work is life is up to scratch. I know it is more complicated than that when your actions have wider reach, especially for someone as high up as a CEO, but for all of us these days with ubiquitous social media potentially giving us all more reach, as what you do in your off-time can negatively impact the company, and your position can lead to your stupid moments having far more impact on people generally. Even a grade A class 1 drunken cockup, in personal time, shouldn't result in a firing unless it is part of a larger or repeating pattern. IMO: he has taken ownership of his actions, accepted that they were stupid, apologies for causing office (and not in the “sorry you found it offensive” non-apology sort of way), etc, so : ridicule him by all means, but sacking seems OTT at this point. And if he does it, or something else similarly foolish, again, then we break out the pitchforks.
- littlestymaar 3y ago
  > this was out-of-hours There's no out-of-hours for CEO. He was using is official Twitter account to make a public statement, that's a work-related mistake. (It's not like he used some anonymous account to troll on some subreddit) > Walmart cashiers shouldn't be sacked for immaturity and poor judgement in their personal lives if their work is life is up to scratch. I don't know if they should, but they definitely are. Musk's obsession with his employees drug use out of work is an example (and also an example of double standards between CEOs and blue collar workers).
  - cqqxo4zV46cp 3y ago
    I agree that this guy is a tosser. I’m always first in line to give a fatcat tech bro what for. But you’re completely barking up the wrong tree with this tribalist argument. You’re holding him to a standard that you at least in part don’t believe in, but are simply saying “an eye for an eye!” when he wasn’t even the one responsible for taking the first eye. Chill.
    - foldr 3y ago
      They may think that it's reasonable to hold tech CEOs to higher standards in this respect than Walmart cashiers. So I don't think there's necessarily any inconsistency here.
    - johnnyanmac 3y ago
      >You’re holding him to a standard that you at least in part don’t believe in In part. but CEOs have a lot more money and PR on the line than some WalMart worker who may not even be recognized by regular shoppers at that store. And yes, some of it is spite. We're in a period of time where the economy is crashing and such C level execs will drop thousands of jobs at the drop of a hat, for people who did nothing wrong and probably made the company millions, billions. I don't really sympathize when suddenly they screw up on their own volition and may be given the sack themselves.
  - dspillett 3y ago
    > There's no out-of-hours for CEO. Unless his contract specifically says that, bull. If his contract foes specifically say that, then I doubt it is legally enforceable anyway. > He was using is official Twitter account to make a public statement, that's a work-related mistake. If he used an official work account, then yes that paints a different picture and is a more clear-cut case of abusing resources and directly bringing the company into disrepute. But @GarryTan doesn't sound like a company account to me (I'm assuming the 陈嘉兴 in the account display name “Garry Tan 陈嘉兴” is also personal name information, not company affiliation, please correct me if I'm wrong). > I don't know if they should, but they definitely are. Calling for the bad side of a double-standard to apply to all is not the way I'd choose to fix the situation. -- Of course the people threatened by the ill-advised quotes, which might indicate overly string views, are well within their rights to pursue legal action against as they see fit, but at this point I'd say it isn't a sacking matter for the company.
chiefalchemist 3y ago
Note: This is a general comment and not intended forgive or incriminate anyone. Perhaps. The thing is, if we only look for leaders who have never erred (read: never fallen and gotten up) we end up with (for example) our "representatives" in Washington DC. That is, generally spineless, middle of the road, etc. The word beige comes to mind. That is, we end up with "leaders" without the toolbox of experiences necessary for effective leadership. Humans? Humans *by definition* make mistakes. Sure some are worse than others. Some demand some mistakes be paid for (in a number of socially acceptable ways). That said, one (rant) is not a pattern. The question is: What are our collective priorities? Human leaders capable of leading humans? Or perfection which effectively translates to no edges, risk adverse, and ultimately flacid and unfollowable?
- littlestymaar 3y ago
  [flagged]
  - chiefalchemist 3y ago
    [flagged]
    - littlestymaar 3y ago
      [flagged]
- johnnyanmac 3y ago
  >What are our collective priorities? Human leaders capable of leading humans? Or perfection which effectively translates to no edges, risk adverse, and ultimately flacid and unfollowable? Sure, I'd take humans leading humans. Probably is we're in an era of humans trying to exploit other humans to appeal to semi-human stock market dynamics (likely funded by rich humans who have much better financial security). I want empathy, and representation of the people's needs. Not some infeasible goal to keep growing profits even amidst a potential recession. I don't know Tan that well, but nothing in the conversation I've read over the past few days has even mentioned him being like that. I don't necessarily have any vested interests here, but I definitely don't have sympathy.
refurb 3y ago
If being immature and showing poor judgement means you can run a VC fund 100% of VC funds would be firing their CEOs. Thats a ridiculous position to say he’s unfit. But I get it. He’s threading the political establishment so they’ll make hay with this to tear down an opponent. It’s politics.
- MomoXenosaga 3y ago
  Yes it's politics and working with computers and man-children all day is poor training. Stick to your lane tech billionaires you couldn't win an election if you were the last person alive.
- chomskyole 3y ago
  From grandparent: > Walmart cashiers are being fired everyday for things like immaturity and poor judgment, why should YC CEO be held under lower behavior standards than blue collar workers?! Parent: >> If being immature and showing poor judgement means you can run a VC fund 100% of VC funds would be firing their CEOs. USA, USA????

hef19898 3y ago

The higher up you are, and the more you represent an organisation, the less immature behavior or poor judgement you cannafford orbare entitled to. USN nuclear sub commanders get replaced for DUIs, because poor judgement is not acceptable. Creating public outrage with drunk rantabon social media falling back on an employer is nothing a normal employee woild get waway woth, let alone a CEO. But in a world where everyone seems to think they are Elon Musk, and not Steve Jobs anymore, it is no surprise this behavior is shickingly common. No, CEO and other public figures from a company should be held to even higher standards than the rank and file.

hindsightbias 3y ago
Think about the industry and the people you'd want to be managing an AGI. These people aren't Chuck Forbin.

jwmoz 3y ago

Heinous cringe.

Cthulhu_ 3y ago
The cringe is the real crime here.

rsynnott 3y ago

> but he's apologised for it so I don't think it's fair to drag him down. So, the way this works is, he can say whatever he likes, but people shouldn't say mean things about him? How does this work? I'm genuinely curious; this, on the face of it, makes no sense to me at all. Is it because he's rich? I don't get it.

refurb 3y ago
Yes, when people apologize for things we generally move on since the person acknowledge their error. Let’s be honest, it’s blowing up because the California political machine is threatened by this guy, and tearing him down for a small transgression means they’ll hold onto the reins of power even longer.
- chomskyole 3y ago
  A death threat by one of the richest persons = A small transgression when they apologise after the fact Seriously?
  - refurb 3y ago
    Nobody would seriously take that as a death threat. No one. But if you’re a politician, it makes sense to claim you “fear for your life”. Like I said, they want to get rid of this guy since he’s a political opponent.
  - framapotari 3y ago
    If I say to you "die slow", would you read it as me threatening to murder you?
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
    - kyleamazza 3y ago
      Are you implying that it's not a threat of any kind? Regardless of how it's enacted? I would certainly rather be threatened with a nice day. Especially in this climate, where the tip of a hat causes anonymous people to pile on and send threats via mail, it wouldn't be as simple as brushing it off. The worst part isn't usually the initial threat, it's the piling on afterwards that can last for months and years afterwards.

Brian_K_White 3y ago

Somehow in all my many alcohol fuelled moments, I never said anything like that. Fuck this odious turd and anyone who would try to excuse him.

zoklet-enjoyer 3y ago
"Fuck this odious turd and anyone who would try to excuse him." I think what you mean to say was: Fuck Y Combinator as a staff, message board, and as a mother fucking VC group. And if you want to be down with Y Combinator, then fuck you too. Sam Altman, fuck you too.
- mindcrime 3y ago
  The birth of a new musical genre - "VC rap" - is happening right in front of our eyes!

stefantalpalaru 3y ago

[dead]

JohnFen 3y ago

That he was drunk makes it very likely that he was expressing what he really thinks. It's not a matter of "dragging him down" as much as "when someone shows you who they are, believe them." Apologizing is great, but it can't make people unlearn something they learned about the person.