Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by klelatti 1880 days ago
It wasn't meant to be criticism.

However, losing 1/3 of your staff overnight over an issue like this does somewhat undermine the JF / DHH narrative of extreme managerial competence.

1 comments

counterpoint - maybe the significance of not undermining the other 2/3 of the company is exactly extreme managerial competence when the crisis has already made itself clear.
If you're saying that limiting their losses to _only_ 1/3 of their staff is a sign of great managerial flair then I'm afraid that I disagree very strongly.
It's like cutting off a limb with gangrene. The mistakes they made to get to this situation have been recognized, and now the next decision is how to make sure you continue to live, unpoisoned.
You do know that the staff cut Basecamp out of their lives not the other way round?

Not sure that comparing 15 or so talented and apparently hard working staff to gangrene is really the most appropriate comparison.

when you 'accept a buyout' that means a buyout was offered. Basecamp was looking to get rid of them.
> Hansson told me that the rules are not draconian — no one is going to be bounced out the door for occasionally straying out of bounds. The founders’ goal is to reset the culture and focus on making products, he said, not to purge political partisans from the workforce.

"..looking to get rid of them". Hmmm.