5 ms·
The best talent probably won't be so quick/shallow/naive to pass judgment so quickly. It probably will challenge their recruitment of women though.
by Bahamut 13y ago
The best talent probably won't be so quick/shallow/naive to pass judgment so quickly.
It probably will challenge their recruitment of women though.
- astrodust 13y agoSo "women" and "best talent" are mutually exclusive? Classy.
- Bahamut 13y agoThat was absolutely not my implication - that is an incredibly dishonest commentary on my post.
- jacalata 13y agoIt's probably not what you meant to say, but it is a plausible reading of the actual text - it's just a slightly awkward phrasing that appears to say 'the best talent won't care, but women might' which casts them as disjoint groups.
- jacalata 13y agoI cannot believe the over-sensitive linguistically challenged group that must be downvoting that. Boy, doesn't it suck to know that sometimes words join together to have meanings and occasionally it includes one you weren't thinking of? Best approach is to say 'oh oops, I didn't mean that' and learn to construct your sentences better for next time. Worst approach is to deny that it could have meant that and learn nothing.
- kogf04 13y agoWell the most followed projects on Github are led and created by men, so....
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- GregorStocks 13y agoThe "best talent" would probably rather work at a company without these kinds of allegations than at one with them. They might be unfounded, but why take the risk? If you're the "best talent," you've got a lot of other options.
- Bahamut 13y agoThis definitely does weigh into many people's consideration I think. However, determining how people will decide when put to such a situation is difficult. Speaking personally, I would certainly be wary, but I'm not going to dismiss a potential employer outright over something I don't have the complete facts about over one story.
- malandrew 13y agoThe best talent would rather work on interesting problems and products. The fact that there may be some wrongdoing happening in some far corner of the company that is almost personal between the parties involved should be so down the list of reasons to work at a company. The answers to these questions are still true today: * does github make a great product? yes. * does their product make software development and open-source better? yes * are there interesting problems to work on there? yes. * would I be working with very talented people there? yes. * based on what we know as facts or admitted to as facts, would taking a job at github subject me or people I care about to these injustices? AFAICT that's no more likely than at any other company comparable to github in terms of the benefits of working there. Anyone working at github is there at will. If they feel wronged, they can leave, which means I don't have to worry about people I care about being wronged. The only way my mind would change on this is if I see a voluntary exodus of talent from github over what happened. Absent talent leaving in the current hiring market, we can only come to the conclusion that these wrongdoings were isolated and personal. Let's keep an eye out for who has left since March 15th, 2014 or so and leaves over the next 3 months. Of that cohort, discount TPW, JAH and anyone who leaves to join TPW's new venture. With the remaining figures, then check if that churn rate for github is any higher than it would have been had this event never happened. If it is not, then this whole issue is pretty much irrelevant.
- antjanus 13y ago