3 ms·

I'm not talking about the pronoun issue, I'm focusing on the hypothetical firing. It's completely unreasonable to fire someone over what in essence is reversin

by yapcguy 13y ago

I'm not talking about the pronoun issue, I'm focusing on the hypothetical firing. It's completely unreasonable to fire someone over what in essence is reversing a commit. It might warrant a discussion with a manager, it might warrant an official warning, and perhaps some other measure but summary dismissal? No way. In my opinion, this is Bryan backing Isaacs, perhaps in a clash of egos with Ben, and grand-standing over an issue which he believes will earn Joyent brownie points. I don't want any developer to work in an environment where the CEO openly boasts about firing people, so in summary, I guess, fuck Joyent.

smtddr 13y ago
And I'm focusing on what you wrote: >> What we have learnt is that the CEO of Joyent is prone to over-reacting and will fire people over nothing. If you think what took place in that github thread was nothing, you represent exactly the dismissive attitude of sexism the tech-industry needs to get rid of.
- yapcguy 13y ago
  I don't see anything in that Github thread to warrant summary dismissal of an employee. A good CEO would ask the relevant manager to sit the two parties down and resolve the situation. If it were not possible, human resources could be brought in to assess the situation and perhaps administer training and/or disciplinary action. A sign of a bad CEO is knee-jerk firing and to write a blog post, boasting about such a hypothetical firing, shows incredibly poor judgement. Let us imagine though that Bryan was right. So why doesn't Bryan fire Isaacs too? Isaacs broke commit rules by not getting his patch signed... what if this was some other commit which made it into deployment and brought down services for paying customers? Shouldn't Bryan view Isaacs as a bad employee who disregards rules and is thus a dangerous liability to the company? "@isaacs may have his commit bit but that does not mean he is at liberty to land patches at will. All patches have to be signed off by either me or Bert. Isaac, consider yourself chided." https://github.com/joyent/libuv/commit/804d40ee14dc0f82c482dcc8d1c41c14333fcb48 https://github.com/joyent/libuv/commit/804d40ee14dc0f82c482d...
  - melindajb 13y ago
    No you don't get it. When you ask someone who is part of an underrepresented minority to "work it out" on an issue of gender discrimination, you are putting the onus on the person who was acted upon to resolve the situation. If you're mugged, do you think the police should ask you and the mugger to meet and "work it out?" The person who committed the offense is the person who should be held responsible. this isn't a matter of opinion or a "cat fight" and your response is exactly why things aren't changing in tech. Most women have encountered a sexist at some point or another, tried to get it fixed and been told to "work it out." How exactly do you "work it out" with someone who is fundamentally convinced your issues are irrelevant?

by yapcguy 13y ago

smtddr 13y ago

And I'm focusing on what you wrote: >> What we have learnt is that the CEO of Joyent is prone to over-reacting and will fire people over nothing. If you think what took place in that github thread was nothing, you represent exactly the dismissive attitude of sexism the tech-industry needs to get rid of.

yapcguy 13y ago
I don't see anything in that Github thread to warrant summary dismissal of an employee. A good CEO would ask the relevant manager to sit the two parties down and resolve the situation. If it were not possible, human resources could be brought in to assess the situation and perhaps administer training and/or disciplinary action. A sign of a bad CEO is knee-jerk firing and to write a blog post, boasting about such a hypothetical firing, shows incredibly poor judgement. Let us imagine though that Bryan was right. So why doesn't Bryan fire Isaacs too? Isaacs broke commit rules by not getting his patch signed... what if this was some other commit which made it into deployment and brought down services for paying customers? Shouldn't Bryan view Isaacs as a bad employee who disregards rules and is thus a dangerous liability to the company? "@isaacs may have his commit bit but that does not mean he is at liberty to land patches at will. All patches have to be signed off by either me or Bert. Isaac, consider yourself chided." https://github.com/joyent/libuv/commit/804d40ee14dc0f82c482dcc8d1c41c14333fcb48 https://github.com/joyent/libuv/commit/804d40ee14dc0f82c482d...
- melindajb 13y ago
  No you don't get it. When you ask someone who is part of an underrepresented minority to "work it out" on an issue of gender discrimination, you are putting the onus on the person who was acted upon to resolve the situation. If you're mugged, do you think the police should ask you and the mugger to meet and "work it out?" The person who committed the offense is the person who should be held responsible. this isn't a matter of opinion or a "cat fight" and your response is exactly why things aren't changing in tech. Most women have encountered a sexist at some point or another, tried to get it fixed and been told to "work it out." How exactly do you "work it out" with someone who is fundamentally convinced your issues are irrelevant?