Ellen Pao Leaves Reddit; Site Founder Steve Huffman Makes a Triumphant Return 467
Deathspawner writes: To say that it's been a tumultuous month for reddit is an understatement. While multiple events have occurred in recent months that have caused an uproar, such as the banning of popular "hate" subreddits, nothing impacted the site quite like the out-of-nowhere firing of "Ask Me Anything" admin Victoria Taylor last week. Following that, other minor revelations surfaced, and finally, this past Monday, reddit CEO Ellen Pao came out from hiding to issue an apology. While her message instilled a bit more confidence in the future of the site, it wasn't enough. Today, it's been announced that Ellen Pao has left the company she joined last fall, and will be superseded by someone who knows what he's getting into: founder Steve Huffman.
Well, she was an interim. (Score:5, Interesting)
All the while, Reddit looks like it acquiesced to the masses. Brilliantly played.
Re:Well, she was an interim. (Score:5, Informative)
FTFY.
Re:Well, she was an interim. (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
"Hate Speech" has no definition (Score:5, Insightful)
By your definition, insults are hate speech.
Hate speech is like pornography/obscenity: No one can define it, and it's usually strangely close to "Stuff I don't like."
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The difference between hate speech and an insult is that hate speech advocates hatred of an entire group over things that they are unable to change. So hatred of black people for their ethnicity, hatred of gay people for their sexuality.
For example:
1. "You're an idiot." Not hate speech, just an insult.
2. "You faggot". Homophobic hate speech, using a word that implies there is something wrong with being gay.
Re:"Hate Speech" has no definition (Score:5, Insightful)
For example:
1. "You're an idiot." Not hate speech, just an insult.
Which is odd, because the pejoratives idiot, moron, imbecile refer specifically to people of a range of intelligences.
IQ
50-69 Moron
20-49 Imbecile
below 20 Idiot
source: http://www.iqcomparisonsite.co... [iqcomparisonsite.com] If calling someone a faggot is hate speech, then calling someone an idiot is likewise hate speech against people with an IQ of less than 20.
Just a matter of time before that becomes a banned word.
note: I'm merely noting it isn't easy to make simple statements of what is or isn't hate speech. I have a gay friend who often refers to himself as a faggot, or even "worse. If I do something stupid, I'll sometimes call myself a "dumb fucking hunky". And neither of us hate ourselves.
I tend to apply it to when threats of violence are made, along with whatever group the perp is encouraging violence against.
Re:"Hate Speech" has no definition (Score:5, Insightful)
Which, of course, they are. People tell insults to work themselves up. They're psychological preparation to overcome the inhibitions against harming others. Since humans are pack animals, this preparation needs to take such highly visible form so either the victim or other members of the pack have a chance to interfere.
Look at every genocide in history. They all have a campaign of escalating slander preceding them.
Pornography is speech aimed at causing sexual excitement, and hate speech is speech aimed at establishing it as acceptable to harm someone. Don't confuse people making excuses for themselves either way for the actual concepts being vague.
Re:Well, she was an interim. (Score:5, Insightful)
100% bullshit.
The very idea that others have to tiptoe around your personal sensitivities is anathema to the very concept of free speech (and, frankly, being an adult).
In particular, the idea that certain groups can assert that other groups are entitled to social protection because of some historical or perceived grievance is not only particularist (and in that sense astonishingly narcissistic) but patronizing as well.
It's really nothing more than oversensitivity, displaced so one doesn't even have to take ownership: "it's not that I'm being hypersensitive, because I'm feeling this way on BEHALF of that person over there."
A very later-20th-century form of nonsense.
Re:Well, she was an interim. (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Well, she was an interim. (Score:5, Insightful)
Nope, SRS and SRD are still there and engaging in harassement as they usually do. So she didn't even manage to clamp down on harassing subreddits.
Don't mistake what the FPH ban was : a political move to gain mainstream political correctness point in the eyes of the HAES and FA movements. Remember : 70% of americans are now overweight (source : http://www.niddk.nih.gov/health-information/health-statistics/Pages/overweight-obesity-statistics.aspx [nih.gov]). It pays to cater to the majority.
If the goal was banning harassment, FPH was not the subreddit to ban. For the most part, they were simply keeping to their own dark corner and doing their thing amongst themselves. You had to go out of your way to "get harassed", by visiting the subreddit while fat and looking for pictures of yourself. Or worse: submitting your pictures in an attempt to get attention.
You just bought the media narrative hook, line and sinker.
Re:Well, she was an interim. (Score:5, Informative)
You just used a lot of acronyms and I have no idea what any of them stand for.
Re: (Score:3)
FPH = Fatpeople hate
HAES = Healthy at every size
FA = Fat acceptance
In other words, Chairman Pao instituted something for political points and SJW's to feel good about, and didn't actually ban subreddits that actually engage in abusive, hateful, doxing, or threatening behavior. And subs like SRS/SRD/and their ilk do engage in it, but since many of the admins suddenly become mods of SRS/SRD when they quit, and they have a favored relationship with the admin, it wasn't in Pao or the admins interest to shut do
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
The problem is that 'harassment' now includes offending someone with words that do not conform with left wing viewpoints, so the debate ends up being about political correctness vs freedom of speech.
Re: (Score:3)
Ever seen US Christians whine about harassment and being attacked? This almost always turns out to be people either denying them special status or saying bad things about them. Instead of "political correctness" as a catchphrase, we get "respect for religion".
Re: (Score:2)
Did they talk about Sarkeesian on /r/FatPeopleHate? Seems unlikely; she seems a bit emaciated by their standards.
Re: (Score:2)
Personally I just hope she gets what her positive contribution to society warrants.
living alone, unnoticed, in a card board box somewhere.
Alas we live in a world with little justice.
Re:Well, she was an interim. (Score:5, Insightful)
Personally I just hope she gets what her positive contribution to society warrants.
Positive contributions? If anything, this woman provides fuel to businesses and corporations that are hesitant to have women climb the corporate ladder.
First she sues her former employer, and loses on all counts.
Then she implements the most stupid HR policy I have ever seen: "we don't negotiate with job candidates because men negotiate better than women".
And the final straw was her not-so-brilliant PR move in upsetting her user base.
Not exactly the strong female CEO that Reddit needs. In fact, Ellen Pao is exactly the opposite of Marissa Mayer. Marissa is, so far, pretty successful in leading Yahoo. I don't work for Yahoo or ever have, but I'm a fan of Marissa Mayer. Silicon Valley needs more women like Marissa, and less like Ellen.
Mayer dishonesty: Firefox switched to Bing search. (Score:3)
For example, I understand that she allowed a deal in which Microsoft pays Yahoo to use Bing search, but dishonestly calls it Yahoo search. (See the title of this web page: Advertise on the Yahoo Bing Network [microsoft.com].)
Then, I understand, Marissa Meyer paid Mozilla Foundation to switch the Firefox browser to Yahoo (actually Bing) search during an "update". That was a sneaky trick. Users of Firefox weren't notified. Most of them do
Re:Mayer dishonesty: Firefox switched to Bing sear (Score:4, Insightful)
Not that I agree with those business tactics, but I think your dishonest = incompetent equation doesn't make much sense. If a con artist manages to con people out of a lot of money, he's definitely dishonest. However you can't really call him incompetent.
Re: (Score:3)
No im sure they can continue to make fun of republicans there.
News flash: Republicans get made fun of everywhere.
Re: Well, she was an interim. (Score:5, Insightful)
Nope, no nepotism here, I am sure that they were each the best man for the job out of a population of 200+ million.
Re: Well, she was an interim. (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Name recognition, and the fact that the other Republican candidates are even worse.
*cough* Donald Trump *cough*
I'm not from the US, but are you people crazy? I wouldn't let him run a McDonald's franchise, never mind the most powerful nation on Earth.
Re:Well, she was an interim. (Score:5, Insightful)
Ellen is a person who brazenly attempted to abuse the gender inequality debate in a high profile court case to make millions of dollars when she was fired for being abrasive, lazy and generally incompetent. Her husband is just as scummy a person, who participates in ponzi schemes and other less than above board activities. I'm frankly happy she's gone from Reddit. She is a horrible person.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Ellen is a person who brazenly attempted to abuse the gender inequality debate in a high profile court case to make millions of dollars when she was fired for being abrasive, lazy and generally incompetent.
Actually, it's not at all brazen. The facts of the case painted the firm as pretty sexist [hbr.org]. What they could not prove to a reasonable standard was that this background sexism was directly responsible for her not getting promotions and bonuses. Her husband's legal problems also complicate the narrative, and cast doubt on her intentions
This is why the civil rights movement in the 60s waited for Rosa Parks, even though there had been several incidents of black women being mistreated on buses prior to Ms Parks'
Re:Well, she was an interim. (Score:5, Informative)
Wait, the infamous bus incident happened in 1955.
Re:Well, she was an interim. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Well, she was an interim. (Score:5, Insightful)
So, you want a client who's squeaky clean, that doesn't have any character flaws or potentially shady past that the opposition can point to. You want someone that is more likely to evoke sympathy, because even though it shouldn't matter in the eyes of the law, judges (and juries) are human, and prone to human inclination of liking or disliking someone.
Re:Well, she was an interim. (Score:5, Interesting)
In one of Malcolm Gladwell's books (forget which one, also take with a grain of salt) The reason that Rosa Parks set things off the way she did wasn't so much about her, but who she knew.
Namely, she had a rather large network of social contacts that could be used to rally to her cause. Had she been the exact same person, but a shut in -- it wouldn't have happened the same way.
Re:Well, she was an interim. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Your complete ignorance of history, especially the history of white supremacy, is laughable. Black people weren't allowed to use the same seats, toilets, pools and rooms as black people. Does that strike you as a time when white people had a positive view of black people?
You and GP are debating different things. The social indicators for black people can be better than today *especially* in a situation of heavy discrimination. South Africa is a case in point: a colleague of mine was educated in South Africa by fantastic teachers, as a coloured /not entirely black kid from a middle class background. The biggest reason was that the smart folks did not get the chance for any of the really good jobs, or starting a company. So a whole lot of them became good teachers. Nowadays,
Re:Well, she was an interim. (Score:4, Insightful)
No, you simply are not listening to what I'm saying.
You are absolutely correct that African Americans faced horrible discrimination and were still dealing with a legacy of slavery of only half a century earlier.
Despite the horrible discrimination African Americans faced then, social indicators like drug addiction, illegitimacy, unemployment rates, wage gap, were a lot better than after another half century of government dependency and handouts.
The civil rights movement demanded the end of government-mandated discrimination, and it ended. That was a necessary and good thing. But then it went on to demand government aid and compensation, and well-intentioned as those programs were, they have turned out to cause enormous harm.
You also need to realize that racist policies like eugenics, segregation, and forced sterilizations were policies advocated by progressives, as the application of science to improving society. These are the same progressives that then adopted new policies after the civil rights movement to discriminate based on race in different ways.
The allegations of the case were not proven (Score:2, Informative)
> The facts of the case painted the firm as pretty sexist [hbr.org].
Those are allegations, not facts. Facts are things actually established in court with legally admissible evidence. Allegations are things people claim. Anyone can make up allegations, the fact that she lost proves that there was insufficient evidence that they were true. Taking all the allegations as "facts" is naive at best. People can and do lie in court.
By way of example, there's a rumor that you're a rapist. It's not supported
Re:Well, she was an interim. (Score:5, Funny)
Wow, I recommend reading the Wikipedia articles on both of them. Quite a pair:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
They are Harvard educated elite grievance energizer bunnies, they just keep going!
Re: (Score:2)
Those among Reddit users that you refer to, the 'horrible' ones, are not the CEO. You're making an apples and oranges argument.
Re:Well, she was an interim. (Score:5, Insightful)
Censoring people undermine's reddit though.
Its like removing all the porn links from google. You only think you're doing something that won't horribly backfire if you don't understand the business you're in.
As the man said "The internet intepretes censorship as DAMAGE and routes around it." You can't censor people on the internet.
And if you turn your site into a corporate friendly disneyland then many of the content creators will leave, you'll give a niche for competitors to exploit, and the viewers that like that content will leave with them.
Think of Reddit like a bee hive. The content creators like bees. And the 99 percent of users that don't actually contribute anything as the Honey.
The problem with bees is that they sting. So somewhere along the way they said "wouldn't it be cool if we could get rid of the bees and just keep the hive and the honey!"... well... sure. But then you'd just have a box of honey. It doesn't work that way though.
The bees make the honey. And the hive is only as good as it makes the bees happy and productive. Fuck with the bees and you get no honey.
Re:Well, she was an interim. (Score:5, Funny)
I find your comment insectist and demand a full retraction and apology.
Re: Well, she was an interim. (Score:3)
Oh boy, this must be Slashdot, here they go with the bee analogy again!
Re:Well, she was an interim. (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
There are all kinds of things going on in a beehive besides bees stinging and making honey. The bees spend a fair amount of time keeping out undesirable organisms.
Re: (Score:3)
You can't censor people on the internet.
Yes, but you can "censor" people on your corner of it. The FPH people can go and set up www.fatepeoplehate-this-domain-name-isnt-used-yet.com and spew uncensored fat people hate to their heart's content.
I don't see why you feel Reddit is obligated to fund their activities by giving them a platform for free.
I'm a member of some other communities online and off. They're completely non corporate and never will be corporate. And yet people incompatible with the organisat
Re:Well, she was an interim. (Score:5, Insightful)
Ellen made all the hard changes, like clamping down on offensive speech.
"Offense is never given, it's only ever taken."
-Unknown
"He who takes offense when no offense is intended is a fool, and he who takes offense when offense is intended is a greater fool."
Brigham Young
WTF happened to the basic American principle of dying for the right of the offensive to be offensive... not just when we don't agree but especially when we don't agree??
Re:Well, she was an interim. (Score:5, Insightful)
SJW (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Thank god we're finally calling these morons out for what they are.
There's a big difference between someone wanting equality and someone whining and neighing about anything and everything, in an endless hunt to be the most offended person possible.
Re: (Score:3)
saying "SJW" outs you as a retard regardless of anything.
Don't worry if the term you, yourselves coined has now turned into a term for "biggest idiots on the planet earth." I have to hand it to you though, you've successfully united both left and right in their hatred of you. Maybe that was your plan all along, but I don't think so.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Ellen made all the hard changes, like clamping down on offensive speech.
"Offense is never given, it's only ever taken."
-Unknown
"He who takes offense when no offense is intended is a fool, and he who takes offense when offense is intended is a greater fool."
Brigham Young
WTF happened to the basic American principle of dying for the right of the offensive to be offensive... not just when we don't agree but especially when we don't agree??
4chan is what happened. Who needs another shitty cesspool of Internet assholes?
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
4chan was sterilized too, during the heyday of gamergate. There are those who think that self righteous, attention seeking victimhood is an example of 'internet asshole.'
Re: (Score:2)
Gee, someone is just a tad biased.
What about when Poole was flirting with investors? At least that was the rumor at the time.
Re: (Score:2)
Everyone does. The more cesspools where such behavior is tolerated, the less we'll have to deal with those people everywhere else.
Re: (Score:2)
> WTF happened to the basic American principle of
> dying for the right of the offensive to be offensive...
> not just when we don't agree but especially when we
> don't agree??
That's not really relevant. Your right to free and offensive speech does not impose on anyone else, person or corporation, an obligation to provide you with a platform for said speech.
What I have to wonder, though, is when in the history of the internet has this sort of thing actually worked? Every example I can recall of
Re: (Score:2)
Americans also don't whine. Make your own damn site. Jesus Christ.
Re: Well, she was an interim. (Score:3)
"He who takes offense when no offense is intended is a fool, and he who takes offense when offense is intended is a greater fool." Brigham Young
"It's easy to maintain a healthy self esteem if you have an enormous haram and run your own religion." -Me
Re: (Score:2)
He who forgets the lessons of the past is bound to repeat it.
There was a reason for the right to free speech. I fear a lot of bad things will come as a result of "moving on" from that right.
Re: (Score:2)
Perhaps you should move someplace where your delicate sensitivities are protected by law. There are plenty of places like that to go (try western europe or the UK). Those of us who prefer our free speech unfettered wish to retain that right (among others). Despite your fallacious attempt to link these rights to slavery, the reality is that slavery is 180 degrees out from them: slaves did not have free speech, right of self defense, or the right to peacefully assemble, either.
Re: (Score:2)
And they made the announcement on a Friday afternoon as close to close of business as possible.
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: Well, she was an interim. (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
If society has devolved to the point where it is acceptable to clamp down on unpopular (aka offensive) speech, then please, kill me now. I want no part of a society like that.
Depends on who's doing the clamping. The Government? Unacceptable. But individuals, companies, corporations don't have to fund or support unpopular or offensive expression - as determined by those entities themselves. The First Amendment only says the Government cannot make laws that interfere with your speech...
Re: (Score:2)
Meet new boss, same as old boss (Score:5, Insightful)
It's pretty clear Pao was just a scapegoat to take care of unpleasant business. It could be she turned out worse than the board expected, but make no mistake: she wasn't alone in driving the New Reddit policies they want, and had the board's full support. Her resigning will change nothing.
In other news: There's voat.co [voat.co] that's turning into a pretty nice community to replace Reddit. It's more like the original and the userbase is pretty big now.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
It's pretty clear Pao was just a scapegoat to take care of unpleasant business. It could be she turned out worse than the board expected, but make no mistake: she wasn't alone in driving the New Reddit policies they want, and had the board's full support. Her resigning will change nothing.
In other news: There's voat.co [voat.co] that's turning into a pretty nice community to replace Reddit. It's more like the original and the userbase is pretty big now.
now i know where to not go if i want to avoid kiddie porn and misogyny. thanks voat!
Given what counts as misogyny these days, I don't even think vacuum is considered free of it. Thanks SJWs!
redditers will flip out. (Score:2, Troll)
wow reddit is going to flip out. I think she was handicapped from day one by her sexual harassment suit at KCPB. reddit definitely has a lot of internet libertarian types who hate anything they perceive as SJW, so for her to come in the door like this was tough. good luck to her, she's a really cool person and has been painted pretty bad in this experience.
Re: (Score:2)
upate: the reddit thread on this topic has 15,000 comments, while this has 60.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Strangely, even us SJW's recognize that not every firing of a woman is discriminatory. It's almost as if you've scarecrowed yourself up an enemy who doesn't exist.
I think firing Taylor was a terrible decision. But we have no evidence - or even allegations - that it was motivated by gender bias. Men and women get fired all the time - and contrary to what your bubble has told you, very few of those firings ever end up in lawsuits.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)
I do find it really, really strange that the SJW side is backing Pao here when the employee she fired is also a woman.
citation needed on this one. where is the SJW side that is backing Pao? unless SJW stands for Strawman Justice Warrior.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I do find it really, really strange that the SJW side is backing Pao here when the employee she fired is also a woman.
citation needed on this one. where is the SJW side that is backing Pao? unless SJW stands for Strawman Justice Warrior.
Misogynist Tantrum Officially Drives Ellen Pao from Reddit [gawker.com]
Re:redditers will flip out. (Score:4, Insightful)
The headline is a little clickbait-y, but the article is neutral. how do you associate one headline with the "SJW-side"? Do they have a parliament where they vote on which position to support? Its a bogeyman that doesn't exist.
Re:redditers will flip out. (Score:4, Informative)
The headline is a little clickbait-y, but the article is neutral. how do you associate one headline with the "SJW-side"?
I find your sneer about a "parliament" rather odd. It's not a "bogeyman" to note that people who generally take one side of an ideological issue will... generally take one side of an ideological issue. Yes, there are disagreements within teams, but it's not unfair to make general statements about ideological teams when those teams usually act like teams.
How many do I need to post to prove my point? Here's Arthur Chu, the self-described "social justice stormtrooper," again expressing the "SJW side": Reddit’s Terrorists Have Won: Ellen Pao and the Failure to Rebrand Web 2.0 [thedailybeast.com]. A big feminist blog: Pao! Right in the Kisser: Reddit assholes celebrate CEO’s resignation after a week of abuse [wehuntedthemammoth.com]. SJWs Brianna Wu [twitter.com] and Randi Harper [twitter.com] are lining up just as one would expect. The NY Times puts their editorial view directly into the news. [imgur.com] I'm sure there will be more in the coming days.
Re: (Score:2)
you're a brave Anon to be making comments as an Anon. the public doesn't know anything about ellen other than a few emotionally-charged data points that everybody uses to support their side of politics/culture and hate on the other side. she's a person too.
What a good day today is! (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
the racist conservative battle flag
You mean the one that Fritz Hollings, the Democrat, fought to install, in the 1960s?
The one that the S.C Legislature, under the control of Democrats for most of the last 50 years, kept up?
Re:What a good day today is! (Score:5, Informative)
the racist conservative battle flag
You mean the one that Fritz Hollings, the Democrat, fought to install, in the 1960s?
The one that the S.C Legislature, under the control of Democrats for most of the last 50 years, kept up?
Yes, fuckface, that's the one. Did you have another one in mind? The Democratic party is the oldest political party in the world still in existence, and for much of its history it has had conservative factions. Even up until the 1980s Southern populists were Democrats until moving to the Republican party. If you think "conservative" is a synonym for "Republican" then you're an idiot. Conservative Democrats created that flag, and were instrumental in keeping it there (I'll ignore the fact that conservative Republicans in the SC legislature are the only ones against the flag's removal, because if it was another time they might have been conservative Democrats; either way they would still be conservative).
Re: (Score:2)
No kidding. What party was Strom Thurmond in (until 1964), exactly? And which party was "the party of Lincoln"? One would have to be tremendously ignorant of history to confuse Democrat with liberal.
Re: (Score:3)
southern democrats in the 60s were basically the party of establishment white people. it wasn't until the 90s that repubs made any inroads there.
Re: (Score:2)
The battle flag of traitors and terrorists who murdered hundreds of thousands of american soldiers!? That battle flag?
I guess it's good to see Republicans trying to disown it.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
"maybe the US flag is also racist? "
Maybe it is. Do you think so? The "don't tread on me" flag was raised by slave holders to fight other slave holders because they were getting taxed too hard. The confederate battle flag was raised by slave holders to fight non-slaveholders because those non-slaveholders elected a president who wouldn't let slavery spread into the western territories. The racism there is a bit more direct.
Of course the relationship between southerners and the flag is complicated, but w
Ding dong, the witch is dead (Score:2)
Ding dong, the witch is dead, the wicked witch is dead.
Except not really. Unless they reverse her changes (bring back Victoria Taylor, restore the improperly banned subreddits that never harassed anyone) and show that they're really committed to communicating with their volunteer mods, then this is meaningless.
At least it's a step in the right direction, now to see if they follow through.
Reddit (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3)
Looks like it.
Re: (Score:2)
A triumphant return deserves ... (Score:3)
some triumphal return music. Any recommendations or favorites?
Re:A triumphant return deserves ... (Score:5, Funny)
Is it back to normal? (Score:2)
As usual, Iowahawk nails it (Score:5, Funny)
applicable or am I just some old guy (Score:2)
I was hoping to find a subreddit on specific technical subjects where I can find useful information like in the usenet days.
good for her (Score:5, Informative)
Whatever you think about Pao, she was in a very tough position. Reddit was in full on shit hitting the fan mode when she took over.
The company had just raised $50M they didn't actually need, with no real plan of what to do next. The new board was micromanaging and not looking out for the good of the company. The corporate culture was self serving and tone deaf. The prior CEO couldn't get a simple office location change through the board and quit. Pao is promoted to interim CEO. The title of "interim" CEO should NEVER have been used publicly. That it was shows the stance of the board towards management. She got some control of the company back from the board, was able to institute some changes and show that the position of Reddit CEO was still meaningful in the company. Think about that transition from when she started and the CEO couldn't change the office space without board approval (that he couldn't get!) to today when everyone can agree that the CEO runs Reddit. She realized when it was time (ish) to go and (presumably) helped get a very good replacement that the board actually likes.
I don't think I would actually like working with her, but I do think she did a good job there.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
> The prior CEO couldn't get a simple office location change through the board and quit.
They tried to force a large part of the workforce to move from NYC to SF, or they'd get fired. That's hardly a "simply office location change", that's forcing people to move across the whole country. The reason wasn't even logical, it's his feelings that "all successful startups are in SF".
> I don't think I would actually like working with her, but I do think she did a good job there.
If by "good job" you mean "ali
Re: (Score:3)
I notice you neglected to mention the whole fucking the users bit. She may have been good at internal politics but she has not left Reddit in any better position than she found it. Since she's been the CEO it seems Reddit's entire business plan involved negative publicity and doing their damnedest to kill off the user base, not to mention firing people who were popular and a help in making some of the site's more unique features run.
I get the feeling we would have been better off if she was ignored as a CEO
Re: (Score:3)
I did leave that off. Because of the money they raised, they needed to boost revenue significantly. This is where people get the idea that she did the "dirty work" of trying to institute advertiser friendly policies (including firing people who were internal advocates of community over profit).
People didn't give Reddit millions of dollars to be nice to the community, they invested that money to squeeze profit out of the community (and to trigger a higher performance based buyout clause from the initial Con
Re: (Score:2)
Have you checked out Leigh Alexander's new website Offworld? I hear it's like Jezebel but better. Give it a try. It sounds closer to your convictions than /. will ever be.
Re: (Score:2)
I've been on Slashdot since you were jacking off to cheerleaders.
Re: (Score:2)
I've been on Slashdot since you were jacking off to cheerleaders.
That's actually a little sad - and my ID is about 100k less than yours. [ Fuck me; I need to get a life. ]
Re: (Score:2)
What's MRA?
Re: (Score:2)
I think he meant Victoria was the successful woman.
Re: (Score:2)
Political Correctness teaches us that women CEO's are always great. So we should hire her, right? I mean, what could possibly go wrong?
I know you're making a point satirically, but for those that don't get it I'll answer with two words: Carly Fiorina [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Bigots and racists and sexists and fat-shamers and MRAs and moderators and even SJWs pissed of at Victoria being fired. A million special interests standing in the way of the common good.