4 ms·
I would say #3 is pretty close too.
by mahyarm 13y ago
I would say #3 is pretty close too.
- tptacek 13y agoA bad reference damages the reputation of a previous employee, but honesty and duty can compel an officer of a company to furnish a bad reference.
- michaelochurch 13y agoA bad reference damages the reputation of a previous employee, but honesty and duty can compel an officer of a company to furnish a bad reference. Wrong.
- tptacek 13y agoWhat I said last time about this: What I have to say about your perspective on references is that I will never, under any circumstances, work with, for, or over someone who believes what I think you're saying you believe about references. "Bad reference => war", to me, is essentially an endorsement of professional dishonesty. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5433552 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5433552 At any rate, thank you for confirming my suspicion that your third "ethic" was "the ethic of not providing bad references ever".
- rdl 13y agoRelated to the earlier thread: how do you (tptacek, moc, or others) feel about hiding expunged criminal convictions. Or vacated ones. e.g. if you were Randall Schwartz, or weev.
- tptacek 13y agoIt depends way, way too much on the circumstances. What we're really asking is, do customers and clients have a right to know?
- rdl 13y agoI actually think I'm sympathetic to not putting even a regular felony on a resume, or disclosing it to HR/early screening; only bringing it up later in the process, but before accepting the job. I'd personally try to bring it up after I've "sold" the company on tech/etc. skills, but before offer letter is prepared. This is assuming it's not asked earlier in the process -- I've never seen "applications" for real jobs (where job app forms often do include "have you been arrested? convicted of a felony?). Even if it is asked I'd rather leave it blank or asterisk or whatever vs. a simple "yes" at the screening stage. But that's about as far as I'd bend things. (and IMO it's wrong to even waste people's time if a felony is obvious disqualification, like for a national security job.) In infosec, it seems like a weird dichotomy between CFAA being a clear "cannot possibly be hired" or "wow, kinda cool". What would be shitty is having a non-professional non-minor-drug-or-traffic conviction, like some kind of sex crime. Finding a job even in infosec with even a minor sex crime on one's record has to suck.
- michaelochurch 13y agoI have no ethical problem with people lying to get jobs, as long as the lies don't pertain to the job itself. Job fraud (getting a job you can't perform, or where the risks are too high) is unethical. If you claim you're a doctor and you're not (quackery) or lie in a government security clearance process, you're doing something immoral (and also quite illegal). However, people often lie, in effect, (a) to inflate their social status, (b) to simplify a complicated story under the (correct) assumption that most people are shallow and averse to complexity, (c) to improve their apparent leverage in negotiation, and (d) to hide embarrassments that are irrelevant to the discussion at hand. I have no problem with people who do that, even if they're lying about objective facts (job titles, performance reviews, dates of employment). The currencies they are counterfeiting (workplace social status, managerial blessing) have no legitimacy anyway.
- yuhong 13y agoWhy? BTW can you write the essay mentioned in the end of http://michaelochurch.wordpress.com/2014/04/06/the-right-and-wrong-way-to-lie-in-business-part-2/ http://michaelochurch.wordpress.com/2014/04/06/the-right-and...
- sheepmullet 13y agoIf I ask you to be my reference then you can say "Sorry mate I won't give you a positive reference because I don't believe you produce quality work. HR can confirm your start and finish date but if they talk to me I won't have anything positive to say." And that's completely ethical. On the other hand if you say "Yeah great mate no problem" and then tell my potential new employer they shouldn't hire me you are acting like a scumbag.
- tptacek 13y agoLying is always unethical. We don't need a special "reference lying" ethical rule.
- sheepmullet 13y agoI'm not sure what you are trying to say. I'm not talking about or supporting lying. I'm saying an employer needs to be professional when providing a reference. If you cannot be professional about it and understand that context is very difficult to convey over the phone with somebody you don't know then let HR handle it and at least be upfront that you aren't going to provide a good reference.
- jholman 13y agoThat also applies to "Not behaving in a way that damages the reputation of his/her company or of YC." I agree with what you say downthread about "the demands of honesty", and so insofar as mchurch believes what you believe he believes, I disagree with him (ha, how convoluted). But I think that it's an ethical issue to grant employees and ex-employees the same sort of reputational respect that you would grant your company, or YC, etc.
- tptacek 13y agoAbsolutely agree! For what it's worth: though I have received an unfavorable reference at least once in my career, I've never actually given one.