Hacker News Reader

> "We're not blaming one employee," said Chief Availability Officer Darryn Dieken

> "For whatever reason that we don't understand, the employee decided to do a global deployment," Dieken went on. The usual staggered approach was therefore bypassed.

> And the engineer who sidestepped Salesforce's carefully crafted policies and took down the platform? "We have taken action with that particular employee," said Dieken.

Holy contradiction, Batman!

View on HN

I don't know what Dieken had in mind exactly, but one interpretation that's not a contradiction could be: "The employee did a clearly stupid thing, we blame them for that. We don't blame them for the outage which we could've contained at multiple earlier steps."

Again - only playing devil's advocate. We'd need to know much more about processes and what actually happened for a better explanation.

To be honest the whole article reads as a straightforward blame-the-engineer speech. They refer to him multiple times and eventually we learn that they have taken action (everybody can guess what this means).

It might also be that they're taking a CYA tone in public but a healthier tone internally.

really dislike the doublespeak here. speaks very poorly of this man’s leadership. either blame the engineer or don’t, but don’t try to have it both ways

Reply on news.ycombinator.com