The guy's reputation was refactored because he sexually harassed an employee, as found as fact by a court of law. Or something.
A reputation should be accurate, should it not?
A reputation should be accurate, should it not?
The court thing was apparently me getting mixed up with the Tinder executive sexually harassing another woman. I guess TPW was only subject to an "internal probe" by Github after which he stepped down because of his apparently crazy wife's actions getting involved in company affairs. Which is legally sexual harassment as well, even if it never went to court.
So I have to honestly retract my statement about him being found to legally be a sexually harasser, which he has not been found to be so. He just appears to be so from everything I've read about the situation.
So on one side you have a multitude of people at Github, including presumably lawyers, HR people, founders, etc. On the other side, you have one person who has allegedly been wronged.
We can't know which side is lying, so I won't suggest which one is lying, though obviously I have my opinion on the matter. I will however state where that opinion comes from: I know from reading about Github's culture that it is a very open culture, which seems to show a deep respect for individuals. Creating this sort of culture doesn't happen by accident. It takes a lot of consistent work over a period of years (I know that because I'm trying to create that sort of culture in my company, and it's not easy at all - there are countless reasons to abort and build a standard, closed culture). To me, what is being alleged by the accusing party is not congruent with the kind of character that would build an open culture.
Obviously you're free to have the opposite opinion, and I respect your right to form your opinion on this matter based on your own beliefs, preconceptions, etc, just as I base my own opinions on my own beliefs and preconceptions.
I think it's important that this respect is mutual, though, and that we both realise we're talking about opinions here, not facts.
That is false. There was no court of law. The internal investigation found that there was no substance to the allegations of sexual harassment, but there was evidence of other inappropriate behaviour (mostly letting his wife Theresa use Github resources // pressure employees (though she didn't think of it that way) into helping with her charity project).
The inappropriate behaviour doesn't sound like enough to fire a CEO, but I'm guessing they realised that the feminist brigades would not rest until they tasted blood and they decided to do the "roll over and play nice" thing, as you do when you have a fiduciary duty to your investors.
Must've been really gutting for Tom to be forcefully removed from his own company on bullshit grounds, though.
(before you say "I don't believe Github's account" - the equally valid retort is "I don't believe the accuser's account" - she seems to have had a really huge axe to grind with someone in this)
I can't get to 500 points fast enough...
Because dissenting views should be silenced. I'm sure you think you're a nice guy too.