4 ms·

The way I understood it went down for the CEO: 1. Made optimistic claims about future product. 2. Some of the people tasked with implementation disagreed abou

by lolc 2y ago

The way I understood it went down for the CEO: 1. Made optimistic claims about future product. 2. Some of the people tasked with implementation disagreed about optimistic claim. 3. Those people got fired for underperforming. 4. All people on the team tasked with implementation agree with optimistic claim. 5. Doubled down on the promise. Repeat every year. I can't see how a CEO could be blamed in this scenario, as clearly they were lied to by their subordinates.

_akhe 2y ago
The CEO is still responsible for their own employees, CEO hired them or directed them to be hired, the CEO (especially this CEO) runs the company. Lying about features or the number of cars being produced etc. can't be limited to mere optimism because they mentioned specific numbers in a public way that were not true. > fired for underperforming The irony, since Musk destroys every brand and product he's ever touched. I've never seen a more polar opposite to the Midas effect at work. It has to be intentional.
- lolc 2y ago
  Why should a CEO be responsible for their employees if they could instead take a huge pay package which they are obviously entitled to given they have to work around their lying employees? That too was sarcasm :-) You shouldn't be too hard on Musk regarding the "destroys" though: Many people are so incompetent you don't even get to hear about their failures! And others loot professionally without you ever getting to know about it. You have to ignore a lot to state "it has to be intentional".
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
danaris 2y ago
Satire requires a clarity of purpose and target, lest it be mistaken for, and contribute to, that which it intends to criticize. See also: Poe's Law. Unless you include some clear indicator that you are being sarcastic, posts like this will be seen as fully sincere by many, many people.
- lolc 2y ago
  True. Sometimes the disconnect bothers me more, sometimes less. There's the hilarity of having fanboys agree with me, which happens sometimes when Tesla's on the menu.

by lolc 2y ago

_akhe 2y ago

The CEO is still responsible for their own employees, CEO hired them or directed them to be hired, the CEO (especially this CEO) runs the company. Lying about features or the number of cars being produced etc. can't be limited to mere optimism because they mentioned specific numbers in a public way that were not true. > fired for underperforming The irony, since Musk destroys every brand and product he's ever touched. I've never seen a more polar opposite to the Midas effect at work. It has to be intentional.

lolc 2y ago
Why should a CEO be responsible for their employees if they could instead take a huge pay package which they are obviously entitled to given they have to work around their lying employees? That too was sarcasm :-) You shouldn't be too hard on Musk regarding the "destroys" though: Many people are so incompetent you don't even get to hear about their failures! And others loot professionally without you ever getting to know about it. You have to ignore a lot to state "it has to be intentional".
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]

danaris 2y ago

Satire requires a clarity of purpose and target, lest it be mistaken for, and contribute to, that which it intends to criticize. See also: Poe's Law. Unless you include some clear indicator that you are being sarcastic, posts like this will be seen as fully sincere by many, many people.

lolc 2y ago
True. Sometimes the disconnect bothers me more, sometimes less. There's the hilarity of having fanboys agree with me, which happens sometimes when Tesla's on the menu.