Hacker News Reader

Comment by chernevik | Hacker News Reader

So, one, whoever wrote this is an idiot.

Given the free and easy style of the startup eco-verse, it's pretty hard to say exactly what this does or doesn't say about whoever / whatever was behind the event. Maybe the President approved this. Maybe an intern slapped it up. Maybe the VP of Marketing submitted the wrong copy by accident. Want to know why Big Corporate has so much bureaucracy? This is why.

But they didn't fix it immediately! Yeah, or perhaps the responsible parties were meeting with investors or home sick or some such.

Things move fast on the intertubes but maybe giving management an evening to 1) realize something's wrong and 2) fix it would provide a better signal of who is and isn't completely out of their minds.

View on HN

> Given the free and easy style of the startup eco-verse, it's pretty hard to say exactly what this does or doesn't say about whoever / whatever was behind the event.

So startup culture is an excuse for hosting an offensive event? Think with your head instead of your dick and you'll come up with infinitely better plans than to have beer wenches around to serve geeks at a tech event.

> Maybe the President approved this. Maybe an intern slapped it up. Maybe the VP of Marketing submitted the wrong copy by accident.

Shame on any of them.

> Want to know why Big Corporate has so much bureaucracy? This is why.

Startup kids could learn a thing or two from mature organizations.

> But they didn't fix it immediately! Yeah, or perhaps the responsible parties were meeting with investors or home sick or some such.

"Fixing it" goes beyond editing the text that was written. "Fixing it" would be not writing it in the first place. "Fixing it" is getting people actively thinking about diversity and equality. Just because you wrote something stupid and edited the page doesn't mean you fixed the problem.

"Shame on any of them."

You're saying shame on all of them, without any moment to hear how this might have been a mistake and not reflective of their organization.

I know zero about these people, they might be every bit as bad as all that. But my suggestion was that perhaps people withhold judgment until the organization has a moment to respond. It's remarkable to see active objection to that. This positive refusal to think or inquire, the justification of reflex, is dangerous.

They did take the time to respond, and up until that response I think most people were just looking for an explanation to know what the real deal was. The response surely gave you that.

They spammed hundreds of people who mentioned them on Twitter with "we're sorry" and linked an apology letter that blamed the people who were offended. The apology letter solidifies the point that they think it's fun and harmless to objectify women, but since some people thought it was in bad taste, they'd edit the page to save their event.

Their response is neither thoughtful nor convincing.

But my bit was about the haste to draw conclusions. That some of those conclusions turned out to be more right than wrong says more about luck than the process by which they were drawn.

Sometimes there are no second chances. Sometimes you should get it right the first time. Especially when it comes to something as obvious as this.

Sorry, but this is not some subtle mistake.

Here's some reading for you, Mr / Ms Perfect.

http://www.amazon.com/The-Crucible-Arthur-Miller/dp/01424373...

I’m not perfect. I’m all for second chances. And they will get them, no doubt. I’m not for banning them from society or anything like that.

Are you quite sure you know what you wrote?

"Sometimes there are no second chances. Sometimes you should get it right the first time. Especially when it comes to something as obvious as this. "Sorry, but this is not some subtle mistake."

Yes, sometimes there are situation where you screw up an interview and don’t get the job. Sometimes there are situation where you write sexist crap and lose your sponsors. That happens.

Whoever made this will get a second chance, only not in this instance. Simple as that. It’s a mild punishment for being sexist. So what. Deserved.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com