5 ms·

> We know we have to take action and have begun a full investigation. While that’s ongoing, and effective immediately, the relevant founder has been put on leav

by laureny 13y ago

> We know we have to take action and have begun a full investigation. While that’s ongoing, and effective immediately, the relevant founder has been put on leave, as has the referenced GitHub engineer. Pretty much a full admission that everything that Julie said is true. This is great news, but putting these people on leave seems to be too nice. It's clear that these two people obey ethics that are in direct oppposition to the healthy growth of the company. Surely they don't want them back? > The founder’s wife discussed in the media reports has never had hiring or firing power at GitHub and will no longer be permitted in the office. Why did it take a Techcrunch article to reach this decision? Didn't anyone at Github see anything wrong with that founder's wife doing what she did, according to Julie's statement? > GitHub has grown incredibly fast over the past two years, bringing a new set of challenges. Nearly a year ago we began a search for an experienced HR Lead and that person came on board in January 2014 Doesn't appear so. They did get an HR person, but an experienced one? Not a chance. No experienced HR person would have let any of that get as far as it got. That HR person should probably be put on leave or be fired as well. > Chris Wanstrath > > CEO & Co-Founder This narrows down the choices: the "founder" who is the cause for all this drama is either PJ Hyett or Tom Preston-Werner.

flylib 13y ago
> Doesn't appear so. They did get an HR person, but an experienced one? Not a chance. No experienced HR person would have let any of that get as far as it got. That HR person should probably be put on leave or be fired as well. > that person came on board in January 2014 most of the things that had happened predated the HR person coming on, but you do have a point, the wife thing should of stopped since January
- nfoz 13y ago
  > should of stopped should have stopped
  - collypops 13y ago
    Thank god you're here. This topic is saddening enough without people making grammar errors too.
sitharus 13y ago
> > We know we have to take action and have begun a full investigation. While that’s ongoing, and effective immediately, the relevant founder has been put on leave, as has the referenced GitHub engineer. > Pretty much a full admission that everything that Julie said is true. > This is great news, but putting on leave seems to be too nice. It's clear that these two people obey ethics that are in direct oppposition to the healthy growth of the company. Surely they don't want them back? It's pretty standard practice to place employees on paid leave while serious complaints are investigated. You don't want to fire them until you have a pretty solid case as they might sue, but likewise you don't want them in the office.
- Alex3917 13y ago
  There is a trick business schools like to play on students, where you are given a test with 10 - 15 scenarios where an employee has allegedly done something wrong and you need to write the proper response from the company. The correct answer to every single scenario is "suspend pending investigation."
- BCM43 13y ago
  >It's pretty standard practice to place employees on paid leave while serious complaints are investigated. Employees? Sure. Founders? I've not heard of that before.
  - jamesaguilar 13y ago
    I also have never heard of a founder being put on leave. I wouldn't go quite so far as to say it is an admission that the allegations are true. But it is certainly an admission that they have merit and are not so far from reality as to be easily dismissed. I am pleased that Github is taking this seriously, and very sorry for Julie's experiences. This should never happen to anyone in our industry.
    - nightski 13y ago
      Maybe the founder chose to go on leave to allow for the investigation? Or at least was involved?
tw268 13y ago
GitHub is known to have a dubstep and IPA culture. If they want to be a standard bearer for feminism in tech, the transition is going to be difficult and they are going to take some hits. The two cultures don't mix well. It sounds like GitHub is going to have to become more stale and corporate to survive as a larger company, which is inevitable, but hastened by their own choices.
- h0h0h0 13y ago
  They will have to move to a MDMA/THC based culture fused with early 90's pop + Mid 2000's minimal techno. This is a small step for a dubstep IPA culture. It's like moving from the Midwest to NYC.
- voltagex_ 13y ago
  Oh come on, what do a music genre and beer type have to do with anything?
- kevincrane 13y ago
  > GitHub is known to have a dubstep and IPA culture. What point are you trying to make here? Are you a classical music and hefeweizen type of employee typically? Or maybe based out of Seattle, in which case you'd prefer a more grunge/PBR culture?
  - philwelch 13y ago
    Here in Seattle we like IPA so much, we invented a dark faux-IPA style called CDA (Cascadian Dark Ale). And no one listens to grunge anymore.
    - matthewgifford 13y ago
      CDA was probably invented in Vancouver, FWIW. http://www.newschoolbeer.com/2012/11/who-owns-cascadian-dark-ale.html http://www.newschoolbeer.com/2012/11/who-owns-cascadian-dark...
  - gdilla 13y ago
revetkn 13y ago
> Pretty much a full admission that everything that Julie said is true. I have no idea whose side of the story is accurate, but there was really no other way for Github to play this, whether they were in the wrong or Julie was in the wrong.
wyager 13y ago
>> We know we have to take action and have begun a full investigation... >Pretty much a full admission that everything that Julie said is true. Lynch! Lynch! Lynch!
rodgerd 13y ago
> This is great news, but putting these people on leave seems to be too nice. It's clear that these two people obey ethics that are in direct oppposition to the healthy growth of the company. Surely they don't want them back? The individuals, while allegedly shitlords in terms of their behaviour, being gone may eliminate 2 problems, but honestly they're products of an overall culture. In a healthy company you wouldn't have a guy (allegedly) reverting commits or shittalking individuals in comments because they wouldn't fuck him for very long after the first few efforts, because their peers or line manager would have said, "dude, not cool". [Edited for clarity]
- x0x0 13y ago
  And their line manager would have followed up with "if I even hear a rumor of this happening again, you'll be fired for cause". Because such harassment is, per my understanding, illegal, and can create enormous problems for the individual, manager, and company. Not to mention incredibly unethical.
phillmv 13y ago
>Surely they don't want them back? People make mistakes; they seem to get a lot of other things right, so maybe the relationship is salvageable - and all he needs is some time off. >Doesn't appear so. They did get an HR person, but an experienced one? Not a chance. No experienced HR person would have let any of that get as far as it got. That HR person should probably be put on leave or be fired as well. Jeez. They hired HR in January; the company has 240 employees many of whom remote. Based on her story, Julie Horvath's relationship was already poisoned by the time they hired this HR person. The screwups were bad but I doubt GH culture is unfixable.
- Bahamut 13y ago
  People make mistakes, but as far as it appears, this was a colossal failure of leadership.
jw2013 13y ago
>>> This narrows down the choices: the "founder" who is the cause for all this drama is either PJ Hyett or Tom Preston-Werner. Any guess?
- pistle 13y ago
  Tom is married. Is PJ?
  - vulf 13y ago
    Yes: https://twitter.com/pjhyett/status/89064336454201346 https://twitter.com/pjhyett/status/89064336454201346
    - bluthru 13y ago
      Heh. Favorited by Tom's wife.
- courtf 13y ago
  I would venture to guess Tom. I certainly don't know for sure, but he has a wife (don't know about PJ's marital status) who is herself a founder/CEO and wouldn't raise eyebrows spending time working at the Github offices.
  - jw2013 13y ago
    Is that a coincidence: https://twitter.com/tpdubs2/status/444509011522891776 https://twitter.com/tpdubs2/status/444509011522891776 Just last Friday his wife's startup is accepted to Techstars NYC, and she is going to be at NYC. It may be a good timing for Tom to take a leave to be with his wife. Just guessing here. I could totally be wrong. No offense to Tom; I looked up to him.
__david__ 13y ago
> > We know we have to take action and have begun a full investigation. While that’s ongoing, and effective immediately, the relevant founder has been put on leave, as has the referenced GitHub engineer. > Pretty much a full admission that everything that Julie said is true. Hardly. It just says they are paying attention to the accusations and taking things seriously. I think they responded in a very positive way, and more transparently than I would have expected. But "we're looking into it" in no way validates or admits any fault on their behalf at this point. > This is great news, but putting these people on leave seems to be too nice. So they should just fire them based on one person's complaints? If everything Julie accused them of is true, I think they should be fired, but that doesn't mean they should go off half-cocked, firing everyone involved until they can investigate and determine exactly what happened. And that doesn't happen over night.
Recoil42 13y ago
>Pretty much a full admission that everything that Julie said is true. No, it isn't. It's standard operating procedure pretty much everywhere to put employees on leave while an investigation is conducted. It shouldn't be construed as an admission at all.
- JeremyMorgan 13y ago
  No but the apology says a lot...
  - Throwadev 13y ago
    Maybe, but it could also be calculated: "If we don't apologize, the mob will cry for our blood even more, and we obviously can't do a non-apology apology, because they'd hate us for that too. Just be humble and supplicate to them so we can keep our IPO--I mean reputation intact."
  - sdesol 13y ago
    The apology could be interpreted in a lot of ways. It could be we fucked up and we are sorry. Or it could be, Julie really blew things out of proportion/overreacted/misinterpreted things and we wish we were better able to react to her hysteria, and we apologize for not being able to. GitHub is a business and they aren't dumb enough to not consult one or more lawyers before releasing their statement. If they are in the wrong, I would have to imagine their best play would be to compensate Julie behind the scene and have her formally come out and say GitHub is doing everything they can to ensure this doesn't happen again.
- greenyoda 13y ago
  "I would like to personally apologize to Julie" certainly sounds like an admission that the company wronged her. And don't lawyers frequently tell their clients not to apologize (even if they feel they ought to), since that may be construed as an admission of wrongdoing in a subsequent legal proceeding?
  - ephemeralgomi 13y ago
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
x0x0 13y ago
I have to say, I'm really disappointed. Unless the allegations are somehow made up -- which seems incredibly unlikely -- this is an enormous lapse from a company I use and admire. Not only did the founders, at least in public appearances, all seem like decent people, but they had one hell of a success story. I also liked their seeming tolerance for remote work and support for people like Julie who tried to make our industry more welcome to women by doing instead of just talking. All in all, I'm really saddened.
general_failure 13y ago
Innocent until proven guilty
PhasmaFelis 13y ago
> This is great news, but putting these people on leave seems to be too nice. It's clear that these two people obey ethics that are in direct oppposition to the healthy growth of the company. Surely they don't want them back? I'm strongly inclined to believe that what Horvath said is true and that these two people should be laid off, but that shouldn't happen before an investigation. If they're not guilty, they should be exonerated; if they are, they should be dismissed with the full weight of evidence, so they can't paint themselves as innocent martyrs.
mikehearn 13y ago
> Doesn't appear so. They did get an HR person, but an experienced one? Not a chance. No experienced HR person would have let any of that get as far as it got. That HR person should probably be put on leave or be fired as well. The HR person has been on the job for a minimum of 31 business days and a maximum of 53. Horvath joined two years ago. Unless you are a GitHub insider, you currently are working off knowledge from a single source in which the information was provided by a person with a specific agenda. It is malicious to call for the HR person's job given your almost complete dearth of information.
- macspoofing 13y ago
  It looks like HR was involved in this case and the issue with the wife seemed have been raised. That should have been an immediate red flag to this "experienced" individual before they even got down to business of addressing any other concerns. It was a major screw-up.
  - mikehearn 13y ago
    Precisely, it "looks like" HR was involved. Can you say with certainty this person, hired in Jan. 2014, was involved? And can you say with certainty that this person could have prevented this? Again, unless you're a GitHub insider (are you?), the answer is no. At the moment, no one on HN knows anything. It's entirely possible this was an HR issue, but specifically calling for the HR person to be suspended or fired, given our collective total ignorance, is a spiteful and bizarre declaration directed at someone the original poster does not know. These are real people, and HN comments – particularly top comments – can influence decisions.
cpeterso 13y ago
> This narrows down the choices: the "founder" who is the cause for all this drama is either PJ Hyett or Tom Preston-Werner. Julie Horvath follows both Chris Wanstrath and PJ Hyett on Twitter, but not Tom Preston-Werner (at least as shown by Twitter's "Followed by people you follow" banner). Of course, this could just be a coincidence.
- chx 13y ago
  I can't find anything on PJ Hyett's family but Tom Preston-Werner is married.
  - snikch 13y ago
    Both are. https://twitter.com/pjhyett/status/89064336454201346 https://twitter.com/pjhyett/status/89064336454201346
vacri 13y ago
Pretty much a full admission that everything that Julie said is true. This is a terrible assumption to make. This line is basically saying "we're taking this seriously", because if they said anything less, then regardless of the truth of the matter, they'd be skinned alive. Ironically, it's knee-jerk black and white comments like yours that create this kind of press release. You've already convicted them in your mind and are looking for any excuse to execute them. I mean fuck, you expect an HR person to come on board and within a month "not have let any of that get as far as it got"? Are they supposed to have invented a time-machine?
- sgrove 13y ago
  I'm similarly blown away that this comment is at the top. What a dangerous conclusion to jump to.
  - bogs_carut 13y ago
    It's particularly frightening to me because it appears that GitHub is attempting to do the right thing here -- investigate the allegations without the influence of potentially involved parties. Yet, if such a thing is construed as an admission of guilt in the greater "court of public opinion" then there's an incentive to actively avoid any attempt at transparency.
- laureny 13y ago
  Fair enough about the HR person (who probably acted in fear for their job), but how often does the co-founder of a very successful start up get put on leave within 24 hours of an article published on Techcrunch?
  - vulf 13y ago
    How? Easily. If you're investigating the matter you want to distance all parties involved from the situation, so that they cannot influence the outcome. If Julie was still employed there, she would have certainly been put on leave as well.
  - 13y ago
phazmatis 13y ago
> ... putting these people on leave seems to be too nice. It's clear that these two people obey ethics that are in direct oppposition to the healthy growth of the company. Surely they don't want them back? Man, talk about CSI justice. Sadly, I think this episode is a two-parter. You'll have to tune in next time, sorry!
ephemeralgomi 13y ago
> Pretty much a full admission that everything that Julie said is true. It reads more like an admission that at least some of what Julie said is not immediately known to be untrue and that they have to check it out. Hence the, y'know, investigation.
product50 13y ago
>> We know we have to take action and have begun a full investigation. While that’s ongoing, and effective immediately, the relevant founder has been put on leave, as has the referenced GitHub engineer. > Pretty much a full admission that everything that Julie said is true. Wow - if anyone wants to see an example of an article being overanalyzed and then terrible conclusions being made out of it, this is a model comment for that. Each of your supposed inferences is critical and harsh. Stop being so cynical - it will help you. The world is still a nice place..
tomjakubowski 13y ago
> This narrows down the choices: the "founder" who is the cause for all this drama is either PJ Hyett or Tom Preston-Werner. https://twitter.com/tpdubs2/status/415224900782014464 https://twitter.com/tpdubs2/status/415224900782014464 > TheresaPrestonWerner @tpdubs2 > Found the best, most comfortable chair at GitHub HQ. Office seems pretty empty today. Among several other tweets here: https://twitter.com/search?q=github%20from%3Atpdubs2&src=typd https://twitter.com/search?q=github%20from%3Atpdubs2&src=typ...
- Dobbs 13y ago
  That doesn't mean anything at all. The company I work for often has spouses and significant others (including the CEO's) around either for drinks in the evening, or just for fun. They don't have any power or influence in the company beyond the typical role of adviser that all spouses serve.
- danbmil99 13y ago
  > Found the best, most comfortable chair at GitHub HQ. Office seems pretty empty today. Hey, this chair seems to be facing that bitch Julie. Imagine that. Now I can give her the evil eye for 8 hours straight!
  - danbmil99 13y ago
    jeez, HN is so damn humorless.
- balls187 13y ago
  I'd expect the founders to refrain from going to social media to speak about this until the internal investigation is done.
cyanbane 13y ago
>> We know we have to take action and have begun a full investigation. While that’s ongoing, and effective immediately, the relevant founder has been put on leave, as has the referenced GitHub engineer. >Pretty much a full admission that everything that Julie said is true. Then I dub you Sir Bedemir, Knight of the Round Table.
ketralnis 13y ago
> Pretty much a full admission that everything that Julie said is true. Bullshit. It just means that they're looking into it.
flylib 13y ago
> This narrows down the choices: the "founder" who is the cause for all this drama is either PJ Hyett or Tom Preston-Werner. why is TechCrunch claiming Scott Chacon is a co-founder? He is married also but his wife is friends with Julie on Facebook so I doubt him I doubt it was PJ's wife - https://twitter.com/kldub https://twitter.com/kldub which narrows it down to Theresa Preston-Werner and just for kicks https://twitter.com/tpdubs2/status/415224900782014464 https://twitter.com/tpdubs2/status/415224900782014464
yuhong 13y ago
PJ Hyett seems to be the COO at GitHub.

by laureny 13y ago

flylib 13y ago

> Doesn't appear so. They did get an HR person, but an experienced one? Not a chance. No experienced HR person would have let any of that get as far as it got. That HR person should probably be put on leave or be fired as well. > that person came on board in January 2014 most of the things that had happened predated the HR person coming on, but you do have a point, the wife thing should of stopped since January

nfoz 13y ago
> should of stopped should have stopped
- collypops 13y ago
  Thank god you're here. This topic is saddening enough without people making grammar errors too.

sitharus 13y ago

> > We know we have to take action and have begun a full investigation. While that’s ongoing, and effective immediately, the relevant founder has been put on leave, as has the referenced GitHub engineer. > Pretty much a full admission that everything that Julie said is true. > This is great news, but putting on leave seems to be too nice. It's clear that these two people obey ethics that are in direct oppposition to the healthy growth of the company. Surely they don't want them back? It's pretty standard practice to place employees on paid leave while serious complaints are investigated. You don't want to fire them until you have a pretty solid case as they might sue, but likewise you don't want them in the office.

Alex3917 13y ago
There is a trick business schools like to play on students, where you are given a test with 10 - 15 scenarios where an employee has allegedly done something wrong and you need to write the proper response from the company. The correct answer to every single scenario is "suspend pending investigation."
BCM43 13y ago
>It's pretty standard practice to place employees on paid leave while serious complaints are investigated. Employees? Sure. Founders? I've not heard of that before.
- jamesaguilar 13y ago
  I also have never heard of a founder being put on leave. I wouldn't go quite so far as to say it is an admission that the allegations are true. But it is certainly an admission that they have merit and are not so far from reality as to be easily dismissed. I am pleased that Github is taking this seriously, and very sorry for Julie's experiences. This should never happen to anyone in our industry.
  - nightski 13y ago
    Maybe the founder chose to go on leave to allow for the investigation? Or at least was involved?

tw268 13y ago

GitHub is known to have a dubstep and IPA culture. If they want to be a standard bearer for feminism in tech, the transition is going to be difficult and they are going to take some hits. The two cultures don't mix well. It sounds like GitHub is going to have to become more stale and corporate to survive as a larger company, which is inevitable, but hastened by their own choices.

h0h0h0 13y ago
They will have to move to a MDMA/THC based culture fused with early 90's pop + Mid 2000's minimal techno. This is a small step for a dubstep IPA culture. It's like moving from the Midwest to NYC.
voltagex_ 13y ago
Oh come on, what do a music genre and beer type have to do with anything?
kevincrane 13y ago
> GitHub is known to have a dubstep and IPA culture. What point are you trying to make here? Are you a classical music and hefeweizen type of employee typically? Or maybe based out of Seattle, in which case you'd prefer a more grunge/PBR culture?
- philwelch 13y ago
  Here in Seattle we like IPA so much, we invented a dark faux-IPA style called CDA (Cascadian Dark Ale). And no one listens to grunge anymore.
  - matthewgifford 13y ago
    CDA was probably invented in Vancouver, FWIW. http://www.newschoolbeer.com/2012/11/who-owns-cascadian-dark-ale.html http://www.newschoolbeer.com/2012/11/who-owns-cascadian-dark...
- gdilla 13y ago

revetkn 13y ago

> Pretty much a full admission that everything that Julie said is true. I have no idea whose side of the story is accurate, but there was really no other way for Github to play this, whether they were in the wrong or Julie was in the wrong.

wyager 13y ago

>> We know we have to take action and have begun a full investigation... >Pretty much a full admission that everything that Julie said is true. Lynch! Lynch! Lynch!

rodgerd 13y ago

> This is great news, but putting these people on leave seems to be too nice. It's clear that these two people obey ethics that are in direct oppposition to the healthy growth of the company. Surely they don't want them back? The individuals, while allegedly shitlords in terms of their behaviour, being gone may eliminate 2 problems, but honestly they're products of an overall culture. In a healthy company you wouldn't have a guy (allegedly) reverting commits or shittalking individuals in comments because they wouldn't fuck him for very long after the first few efforts, because their peers or line manager would have said, "dude, not cool". [Edited for clarity]

x0x0 13y ago
And their line manager would have followed up with "if I even hear a rumor of this happening again, you'll be fired for cause". Because such harassment is, per my understanding, illegal, and can create enormous problems for the individual, manager, and company. Not to mention incredibly unethical.

phillmv 13y ago

>Surely they don't want them back? People make mistakes; they seem to get a lot of other things right, so maybe the relationship is salvageable - and all he needs is some time off. >Doesn't appear so. They did get an HR person, but an experienced one? Not a chance. No experienced HR person would have let any of that get as far as it got. That HR person should probably be put on leave or be fired as well. Jeez. They hired HR in January; the company has 240 employees many of whom remote. Based on her story, Julie Horvath's relationship was already poisoned by the time they hired this HR person. The screwups were bad but I doubt GH culture is unfixable.

Bahamut 13y ago
People make mistakes, but as far as it appears, this was a colossal failure of leadership.

jw2013 13y ago

>>> This narrows down the choices: the "founder" who is the cause for all this drama is either PJ Hyett or Tom Preston-Werner. Any guess?

pistle 13y ago
Tom is married. Is PJ?
- vulf 13y ago
  Yes: https://twitter.com/pjhyett/status/89064336454201346 https://twitter.com/pjhyett/status/89064336454201346
  - bluthru 13y ago
    Heh. Favorited by Tom's wife.
courtf 13y ago
I would venture to guess Tom. I certainly don't know for sure, but he has a wife (don't know about PJ's marital status) who is herself a founder/CEO and wouldn't raise eyebrows spending time working at the Github offices.
- jw2013 13y ago
  Is that a coincidence: https://twitter.com/tpdubs2/status/444509011522891776 https://twitter.com/tpdubs2/status/444509011522891776 Just last Friday his wife's startup is accepted to Techstars NYC, and she is going to be at NYC. It may be a good timing for Tom to take a leave to be with his wife. Just guessing here. I could totally be wrong. No offense to Tom; I looked up to him.

__david__ 13y ago

> > We know we have to take action and have begun a full investigation. While that’s ongoing, and effective immediately, the relevant founder has been put on leave, as has the referenced GitHub engineer. > Pretty much a full admission that everything that Julie said is true. Hardly. It just says they are paying attention to the accusations and taking things seriously. I think they responded in a very positive way, and more transparently than I would have expected. But "we're looking into it" in no way validates or admits any fault on their behalf at this point. > This is great news, but putting these people on leave seems to be too nice. So they should just fire them based on one person's complaints? If everything Julie accused them of is true, I think they should be fired, but that doesn't mean they should go off half-cocked, firing everyone involved until they can investigate and determine exactly what happened. And that doesn't happen over night.

Recoil42 13y ago

>Pretty much a full admission that everything that Julie said is true. No, it isn't. It's standard operating procedure pretty much everywhere to put employees on leave while an investigation is conducted. It shouldn't be construed as an admission at all.

JeremyMorgan 13y ago
No but the apology says a lot...
- Throwadev 13y ago
  Maybe, but it could also be calculated: "If we don't apologize, the mob will cry for our blood even more, and we obviously can't do a non-apology apology, because they'd hate us for that too. Just be humble and supplicate to them so we can keep our IPO--I mean reputation intact."
- sdesol 13y ago
  The apology could be interpreted in a lot of ways. It could be we fucked up and we are sorry. Or it could be, Julie really blew things out of proportion/overreacted/misinterpreted things and we wish we were better able to react to her hysteria, and we apologize for not being able to. GitHub is a business and they aren't dumb enough to not consult one or more lawyers before releasing their statement. If they are in the wrong, I would have to imagine their best play would be to compensate Julie behind the scene and have her formally come out and say GitHub is doing everything they can to ensure this doesn't happen again.
greenyoda 13y ago
"I would like to personally apologize to Julie" certainly sounds like an admission that the company wronged her. And don't lawyers frequently tell their clients not to apologize (even if they feel they ought to), since that may be construed as an admission of wrongdoing in a subsequent legal proceeding?
- ephemeralgomi 13y ago

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

x0x0 13y ago

I have to say, I'm really disappointed. Unless the allegations are somehow made up -- which seems incredibly unlikely -- this is an enormous lapse from a company I use and admire. Not only did the founders, at least in public appearances, all seem like decent people, but they had one hell of a success story. I also liked their seeming tolerance for remote work and support for people like Julie who tried to make our industry more welcome to women by doing instead of just talking. All in all, I'm really saddened.

general_failure 13y ago

Innocent until proven guilty

PhasmaFelis 13y ago

> This is great news, but putting these people on leave seems to be too nice. It's clear that these two people obey ethics that are in direct oppposition to the healthy growth of the company. Surely they don't want them back? I'm strongly inclined to believe that what Horvath said is true and that these two people should be laid off, but that shouldn't happen before an investigation. If they're not guilty, they should be exonerated; if they are, they should be dismissed with the full weight of evidence, so they can't paint themselves as innocent martyrs.

mikehearn 13y ago

> Doesn't appear so. They did get an HR person, but an experienced one? Not a chance. No experienced HR person would have let any of that get as far as it got. That HR person should probably be put on leave or be fired as well. The HR person has been on the job for a minimum of 31 business days and a maximum of 53. Horvath joined two years ago. Unless you are a GitHub insider, you currently are working off knowledge from a single source in which the information was provided by a person with a specific agenda. It is malicious to call for the HR person's job given your almost complete dearth of information.

macspoofing 13y ago
It looks like HR was involved in this case and the issue with the wife seemed have been raised. That should have been an immediate red flag to this "experienced" individual before they even got down to business of addressing any other concerns. It was a major screw-up.
- mikehearn 13y ago
  Precisely, it "looks like" HR was involved. Can you say with certainty this person, hired in Jan. 2014, was involved? And can you say with certainty that this person could have prevented this? Again, unless you're a GitHub insider (are you?), the answer is no. At the moment, no one on HN knows anything. It's entirely possible this was an HR issue, but specifically calling for the HR person to be suspended or fired, given our collective total ignorance, is a spiteful and bizarre declaration directed at someone the original poster does not know. These are real people, and HN comments – particularly top comments – can influence decisions.

cpeterso 13y ago

> This narrows down the choices: the "founder" who is the cause for all this drama is either PJ Hyett or Tom Preston-Werner. Julie Horvath follows both Chris Wanstrath and PJ Hyett on Twitter, but not Tom Preston-Werner (at least as shown by Twitter's "Followed by people you follow" banner). Of course, this could just be a coincidence.

chx 13y ago
I can't find anything on PJ Hyett's family but Tom Preston-Werner is married.
- snikch 13y ago
  Both are. https://twitter.com/pjhyett/status/89064336454201346 https://twitter.com/pjhyett/status/89064336454201346

vacri 13y ago

Pretty much a full admission that everything that Julie said is true. This is a terrible assumption to make. This line is basically saying "we're taking this seriously", because if they said anything less, then regardless of the truth of the matter, they'd be skinned alive. Ironically, it's knee-jerk black and white comments like yours that create this kind of press release. You've already convicted them in your mind and are looking for any excuse to execute them. I mean fuck, you expect an HR person to come on board and within a month "not have let any of that get as far as it got"? Are they supposed to have invented a time-machine?

sgrove 13y ago
I'm similarly blown away that this comment is at the top. What a dangerous conclusion to jump to.
- bogs_carut 13y ago
  It's particularly frightening to me because it appears that GitHub is attempting to do the right thing here -- investigate the allegations without the influence of potentially involved parties. Yet, if such a thing is construed as an admission of guilt in the greater "court of public opinion" then there's an incentive to actively avoid any attempt at transparency.
laureny 13y ago
Fair enough about the HR person (who probably acted in fear for their job), but how often does the co-founder of a very successful start up get put on leave within 24 hours of an article published on Techcrunch?
- vulf 13y ago
  How? Easily. If you're investigating the matter you want to distance all parties involved from the situation, so that they cannot influence the outcome. If Julie was still employed there, she would have certainly been put on leave as well.
- 13y ago

phazmatis 13y ago

> ... putting these people on leave seems to be too nice. It's clear that these two people obey ethics that are in direct oppposition to the healthy growth of the company. Surely they don't want them back? Man, talk about CSI justice. Sadly, I think this episode is a two-parter. You'll have to tune in next time, sorry!

ephemeralgomi 13y ago

> Pretty much a full admission that everything that Julie said is true. It reads more like an admission that at least some of what Julie said is not immediately known to be untrue and that they have to check it out. Hence the, y'know, investigation.

product50 13y ago

tomjakubowski 13y ago

> This narrows down the choices: the "founder" who is the cause for all this drama is either PJ Hyett or Tom Preston-Werner. https://twitter.com/tpdubs2/status/415224900782014464 https://twitter.com/tpdubs2/status/415224900782014464 > TheresaPrestonWerner @tpdubs2 > Found the best, most comfortable chair at GitHub HQ. Office seems pretty empty today. Among several other tweets here: https://twitter.com/search?q=github%20from%3Atpdubs2&src=typd https://twitter.com/search?q=github%20from%3Atpdubs2&src=typ...

Dobbs 13y ago
That doesn't mean anything at all. The company I work for often has spouses and significant others (including the CEO's) around either for drinks in the evening, or just for fun. They don't have any power or influence in the company beyond the typical role of adviser that all spouses serve.
danbmil99 13y ago
> Found the best, most comfortable chair at GitHub HQ. Office seems pretty empty today. Hey, this chair seems to be facing that bitch Julie. Imagine that. Now I can give her the evil eye for 8 hours straight!
- danbmil99 13y ago
  jeez, HN is so damn humorless.
balls187 13y ago
I'd expect the founders to refrain from going to social media to speak about this until the internal investigation is done.

cyanbane 13y ago

ketralnis 13y ago

> Pretty much a full admission that everything that Julie said is true. Bullshit. It just means that they're looking into it.

flylib 13y ago

> This narrows down the choices: the "founder" who is the cause for all this drama is either PJ Hyett or Tom Preston-Werner. why is TechCrunch claiming Scott Chacon is a co-founder? He is married also but his wife is friends with Julie on Facebook so I doubt him I doubt it was PJ's wife - https://twitter.com/kldub https://twitter.com/kldub which narrows it down to Theresa Preston-Werner and just for kicks https://twitter.com/tpdubs2/status/415224900782014464 https://twitter.com/tpdubs2/status/415224900782014464

yuhong 13y ago

PJ Hyett seems to be the COO at GitHub.