thrwwy20120508

Thanks for your input, I do appreciate your insight.

I will argue that it's not just a 70% chance that I'm a cynic -- I'll admit that I am a cynic. It's something that I'll have to work on.

> But do you plan on showing that post to any potential employers?

I probably won't say it in the way I wrote the post, since I think it will be open to misinterpretation that might close some doors unnecessarily. But I will definitely bring up my expectations as a matter of concern.

Indeed, a fine line to walk.

I'll take your assessment at face value. What you said needed to be said, though I assure you that I harbor no illusions of startup-land being a worker's paradise.

That said, I'm not sure I understand -- what level of "maturity" do you expect from prospective startup employees, and how do you determine that?

I'm not saying that I can't handle pressure, but I firmly believe that just calling yourself a startup does not give you latitude to overwork your employees.

It is now 6:45 pm and there are only 12 people in our office. We have 65 people that work here in Seattle. This is totally unacceptable.

This company has far too much very important work to do to have virtually empty offices at 6:45 pm. If anyone thinks that everything we need to do as a company can be accomplished within an 8 hour day, then I think they fail to understand the scope and complexity of our venture. Anyone harboring such illusions should seriously consider a career change. I am sure that I could point to tasks for every single person in this company that would merit working past 7 pm every single night.

...

This is not a bank; this is not Boeing. This is a start-up and we are all expecting to be rewarded for taking the risk of a start-up. But, there will be no rewards without exceptional effort.

Given the severity of the situation, I am putting strict office hours into effect immediately. Until further notice, all employees are required to be at their desk from 8am until 7pm, with 30 minutes for lunch. There are no exceptions.

-- excerpted from email from MyLackey (http://web.archive.org/web/20070318005206/http://www.fuckedc...)

Sadly, I fear that situations like this are not an exceptional case in startup-land.

For the record, I think I wrote enough in the original post to show that I'm highly skeptical of startups that claim to have awesome work environments. That said, the community response has definitely been helpful for me to figure out some realistic expectations.

> There are silly startups because people (for one reason or another) are willing to invest in them, and generally those folks aren't the founders.

I don't think I'd be happy at a company whose own founders don't believe in their mission and are only in it for the money. Built to flip, right?

I'm not painting with a wide brush here, I'm just acknowledging that blind faith in PG's stamp of approval is insufficient to make any determination of whether a particular company is worthwhile or not. I'm sure there's quite a few well-run YC-funded startups; I just have to make that call myself.

I appreciate your perspective and reassurance, and I agree with nearly everything you said, but wow, that's a pretty damning view of things. You made it sound like I've missed the boat that left in 2006! I do feel a bit antsy that once we have a high-profile collapse of a company like Groupon or Zynga that the rest of the startup ecosystem will be dragged down with it.

After reading your comment, I ought to clarify a few things:

(1) I have in fact been unemployed for several months, mostly because I needed the break and have decided that I should be more careful about where I choose to work next to avoid going through the same nightmare again. Even so, I'm not in a hurry to get a paycheck and am willing to take the time for finding a good match. But I'm aware that many employers look upon this rather negatively and will be rather "curious" about what happened.

(2) The "bureaucracy" aspect I was whining about was not so much dysfunctional relationships as it was pure cluelessness and red tape. Think 6-month wait times for a 15-minute procurement job, or crappy tools that were "standardized" in the company based on some sales pitch delivered at the VP level. I'd imagine it's this type of situation that is more easily avoidable at a startup.

I have a vague hunch of what you mean by "VC darling" and am taking all mentions of high-profile backers with a grain of salt, but I'm curious about what you consider "Real Technology" -- in what ways are the technical challenges, from usability to scalability, of a social media "joke" startup substantially different from those of a business that you'd take seriously?

> Lastly one of the biggest lessons someone pointed out to me is we teach other people how to treat us. If someone calls you at 10pm at night and asks you to do something and you do it. You have just confirmed to that person this is ok.

So true! I still did it after vehemently expressing my displeasure and taking my manager's word that it was "just this time only" -- then he did the same thing the next week!

After that experience, I'd much rather risk getting fired than subject myself to that sort of abuse repeatedly.

> if you have the financial risk tolerance to work at a startup, why not start your own company instead?

I don't think I'm ready for that yet, and I'd like to think that working at a startup will better prepare me for starting my own.

What really sent me down this path was PG's comment suggesting that "you can titrate the amount of startupness you get in your job by the size of the company you join." (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1346224) It's not a binary decision, but a sliding scale.

> By the way, my friend had an offer at a VC darling, for 60% of the salary he was making but about 0.25% of the company. When he asked if there were preferences against that equity, the offer was rescinded. I don't know if this is normal, but it is telling.

This is disturbing, but it does seem like he dodged a bullet there.

I'll corroborate that I had an offer rescinded when I tried to negotiate salary and benefits... but this was not a startup. Do companies that behave like this think that everyone is desperate to work for them?

> Start-ups have their pick of motivated young professionals, and they’re certainly not afraid of personnel shake-ups. Showing that you can easily roll with the punches is one way to ensure your success.

This seems to be at odds with the constant complaint of a talent shortage, especially when startups have to compete with the offers made by AmaGooBookSoft. Which is to be believed?