Hacker News Reader

Comment by bin_bash | Hacker News Reader

They have a policy that XX% of engineers in a given department should* be given "Meets Most". If that's not stack ranking I'm not sure what would be.

BTW "meets most" likely doesn't sound too bad to non-Metamates. Internally it's a pretty bad mark on your record. It doesn't directly relate to being fired but a ton of people quit when they receive it. I view it as sort of a "pre-PIP" state.

(* Managers/directors will say it's only a suggestion but nobody really believes that. I'm sure management themselves are frowned upon for not having enough MM under them.)

View on HN

> "meets most" likely doesn't sound too bad to non-Metamates. Internally it's a pretty bad mark on your record.

The kind of newspeak I've heard from multiple friends and former coworkers that ended up at FB/Meta at some point. Well, the ones that didn't fall into the cult of Mark.

It might be because I'm getting older but this is the kind of stuff that makes me want to puke. The co-optation of language to exude an aura of friendliness is absolutely disgusting.

Are you talking about "Metamates"—if so I said that ironically. I don't think I've ever heard anyone outside of the execs use that term when they weren't being sarcastic.

No, I meant in the case of "meets most" being used in an extremely negative connotation.

ah apologies, I'm not sure why I didn't read that correctly the first time. It's wrong to call it "extremely negative" though, my words were "pretty bad". There are 2 levels lower than MM but they're rarely used.

MM is a warning—it means you need to improve or you'll likely be put on a PIP.

No worries! I apologise for misrepresenting it as "extremely negative", still with the meaning of "pretty bad" I believe it's a specially disgusting type of language, why use positive-sounding jargon for "underperforming"? What's wrong with using "underperfoming" if that's what "meets most" means?

I despise this, the dissonance between a positivity-sounding "meets most" with the actual meaning being "pretty bad" is what I expect from the North Korean regime, or Russia. It's a disgusting type of newspeak/corporatespeak which, admittedly irrationally, boils my blood.

There actually is a reason (though you might not like it). The internal docs are pretty open about this, I think I can do a decent job capturing the idea:

The idea is they consider themselves to have a very high bar (which I think is largely accurate). They say you “meet most expectations” which means you hit the marks on all but 1 or 2 criteria. It’s not that you’re not good at your job, it’s that that’s not good enough for them.

Of course anyone receiving a MM is having a very shitty day despite that. They could use more direct language but I’m not sure it would have any practical difference.

See the comments in this thread and elsewhere about HR related issues and you can gauge how much plain speak is hated. So no wonder companies, HR departments resort to newspeak.

People hate it when they realize they wasted their lives trying to appease some faceless corporate masters, only to be stabbed in the back.

It doesn't matter how much friendly-sounding bullshit you slather on if that's what's happening.

relevant to the overarching topic: https://dilbert.com/strip/2021-05-24

It's basically a 3 star review, the labels don't actually matter. Is a 3 star good? or is it bad? Who knows. It either depending on context. And that's why people don't like it.

> XX% of engineers in a given department should* be given "Meets Most"

Hmmm this doesn’t sound like the Facebook I worked at

it used to be documented publicly (internally). Last I checked (around a year ago) you could still find the doc somewhere in history. Ask on Blind, they'll send you a link.

EDIT: sorry I see you said "worked at". So I guess you won't be able to verify.

In this thread someone mentions it exactly how I remember the doc describing it: https://www.teamblind.com/post/Companies-With-Stacked-Rankin...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com