Why I will not exercise my GitLab stock options

Also, damn, that email from the CEO about his private Twitter. That's completely out of line.

For those of you that didn't read the article, the CEO called him out about a specific tweet (on a personal account with only 146 followers) where he linked to GitLab's page on Github for crying out loud.

(also, curious note: this comment went from 4 points to zero in less than five minutes. Hmmmm.)

All the other cultural issues he seems to bemoaning are all consequences of growth in a startup. Information flow gets harder with more people.

As far as the CMO moving on to github, that certainly doesn't seem to be all that sinister of an indictment. If you have experience in marketing a developer tool to developers and software businesses, you're probably going to leverage that experience getting a job marketing a developer tool to developers and software businesses.

The one thing he's likely right about is that there probably isnt enough market to actually chase, github has a huge piece of it already and hasn't been able to liquidate, so its not obvious where their growth is going to come from besides eating away githubs marketshare. But thats probably why they seem to be pivoting more towards a holistic tool set that is bigger than version control (like the atlassian example). But only time, execution, and a whole lot of luck with show how it all pans out.

Then I saw the communication about performance and then the firing, and I don't feel a reason to doubt the author. It's not a new story or situation. I've witnessed first-hand how some employees can be 'set up' by management to pretty much ensure a Termination channel. I'm not claiming the employee in my example was a Saint, but I watched the machine work and HR is not your friend.

A distant relative I got to meet was a career HR professional, eventually becoming the Top Dog at a company with 20k+ employees. He had one phrase for me that has been and continues to be invaluable: Guard Your Words & Actions.

This article should be appreciated for digging into the personal elements of reflecting on 'warning signs' that maybe there wouldn't be a happy ending. Wisdom is not always easily earned. What this author did is share some very personal experiences in their own perspective and I think, in many ways, it's like therapy.

We sometimes question our own choices and intentions in hindsight because in the moment clarity isn't possible. We're human. This piece felt very liberating to me, because I know I've been in similar situations and wondered if I was the one out of line or if maybe there was a bigger picture.

Sometimes talking dollars is the way we get down to what we value. This author is essentially putting his money where his mouth is. That, to me, is important and impressive.

If you have constructive criticism because you believe in a company and want them to do better, give it directly to the people involved. Otherwise I just have to wonder what the real motive is behind making a public statement like this.

I feel that a company should always give feedback to an employee who is let go. Whether it's a simple letter or an exit interview, individuals should have closure when they're leaving a company and it doesn't sound like the author received that feedback. Furthermore, if nobody - a manager, for example - explicitly says "your job performance is not up to par for your position and we need to improve that" before an employee is let go then that shows a lack of organizational maturity.

I think the gripes he had were somewhat fair; if a mid-level engineer is given a task outside his comfort zone and he communicates that he's having trouble then a good senior engineer should be able to provide design and implementation advice to the less skilled employee. In my opinion, that's a huge portion of being a senior engineer - if one employee is floundering in his technical task then you need to be there as a patient, understanding, and willing mentor. Heck, even senior engineers aren't immutable bastions of knowledge and should rely on their fellow senior engineers to be a mesh network of interlinking skill sets.

The email about the tweet seemed justified if a little petty. The author was expressing pride over contributing to the product his company was putting forth. While it could be argued that he should have linked to GitLab itself, it is a gray area and I feel that stark admonishment isn't a fair or correct response.

In the end, it's still a very public complaint and these articles are mostly frowned on. That being said, I appreciate that this Medium post exists. It's a point of view to take into consideration if I ever plan to interview at GitLab - even if the author is enacting the definition of 'burning bridges.' To conclude, whenever I read articles like this I always have to think "well, what other points of view are there to consider?"

It amazes me that far too many here are afraid of repercussions and retaliation by future employers (just see the "warnings" about bad blood in the comments here). That too on HN (who are supposedly the idealists who want to changes the world and all that)! Seriously guys, all this person has done is detail his experiences in what he thinks is the truth. And believes it enough to let go of a good chunk of money.

Also, this comment surprised me (from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14037692):

"Unfortunately, as a contractor, you do not have these protections. Given that the entire company is remote, only a tiny percentage of the people that work at GitLab are actually employees, and they take full advantage of that. "

Wow.

I have thoughts about whether his perceptions are accurate, but I mostly just want to say: kids, if you're thinking of writing something like this, probably don't. Go out for drinks with a friend and vent one on one instead.

If this bitch-fest affects his career at all, it won't be in a good way.

I've seen more than one developer lose their jobs over politics. One guy, I've seen sabotage job after job over his idealism. I try to help him but you can't teach political savvy to an unwilling student. He hears and understands me, then goes and does the exact opposite of what I tell him to do. And it has exactly the effect I predicted.

I maintain that the biggest reason developers can't get ahead is because they don't have the stomach for politics.

0.1% of a Series B company is the entire four-year grant for a new engineer, or several sales / operations folks.

Pretty disappointed.

Of course it being open source does help a lot.

While his past employer probably has right of first refusal on the units, wouldn't he still come out ahead if I wanted to pay him, say, $10000 for the 15000 units?

Could they have legally pre-emptively blocked the sale? Are there standard agreements where I could take ownership of the value behind those units without having full ownership or voting rights?

This is something all entrepreneurs who are looking for investments should really understand. VC money dictates huge growth and this is not suitable for all business opportunities. For some viable businesses taking VC money is akin to signing their own death sentence.

That being said, working at a startup is like a marriage, you have to find the right fit. When he joined Gitlab, it may have been the right fit, but companies and founders much like everyone else who suddenly comes into money, often change. Sometimes even thought you love the company, priorities shift and change. When you start noticing that, it may be time to move on.

Kudos to him on not choosing to cash in his options. Definitely putting his money where his mind is.

That's almost certainly wise on his part. I know I endeavor never to discuss (someone other than my personal) employment issues publicly, for myriad legal and ethical reasons.

Telling your friends that you don't value the thing you've all been pouring your life into is tough. It feels like you're insulting them. Esp when there's still money in the bank and the investors don't know what you know about the company. But I saw the writing on the wall. The ship was sinking and I couldn't get them to plug the leak.

Ultimately I decided that I'd rather give up my lottery ticket and be happy. Turned out I ended up happy and much better off financially and emotionally. As always there's a relevant xkcd: https://xkcd.com/1768/

For whatever reason it wasn't a good fit. It's not professional at all and speaks badly on your character and appears immature. It shouldnt be a revelation that culture changes when you go from 10 to 100 employees.

He doubles down on this by making financial decisions based upon his hurt feelings, like he still holds a grudge and isn't over it. Who wants to employ someone like that?

Nobody wants to hire someone who tried bashing on his former employer.

That sounds incredibly creepy to me (as does the whole astroturfing communication from GitLabs).

Do most countries do this? I always thought it was a US only thing.

Its a good deal and nobody cares about your emotions. (ESO fund just fronts the capital for you to buy the shares you are entitled to, and makes a separate contract entitling them to some profits, risk free for you)

Silly to spend that much of your life just to weigh $4000 or so and write a blog post the circumstances leading up to that decision, when there's infrastructure to remove the decision making process out of it.

Why would I want your app or open it on app? It's s damn simple blog not some kind of webapp.

Svbtl.com was also a thing here time ago, why did that platform become uncool?

After a while, some of the early passionate team members have to compromise with the situation or move on to something else.

Didn't know remote work would play a role in this matter. Is that true?

I'm sure there's a ton left out, and this seems like a bitter hit piece rather than a well-thought-out, balanced critique of a company.