Kinja reply list

Read More
bumpdatJay Hathaway
3/27/15 6:09pm
Great, just great. Anyone know if they can appeal? I was really hoping she was going to win. Her story sounds like me and so many of my friends work stories. Such bullshit and it happens every day.
Reply
- Read More
  Nine-Leaf Cloverbumpdat
  3/27/15 6:19pm
  I don't know enough about the details to have much an opinion on the merits of her suit but...
  I was hoping she was about to do some serious damage to douche-bro culture in the tech industry.
  
  Now it just looks like her case was dismissed on the grounds of being a silly little woman who let her emotions get out of hand. Fuck that.
  Reply
- Read More
  Multi-Carniebumpdat
  3/27/15 6:20pm
  They can appeal, but it could be unlikely.
  
  The only thing usually worth appealing are what you would call "legal" errors. Did the judge let in the wrong evidence, or exclude proper evidence you needed to make your claim? Did they tell the jury the wrong instruction (i.e., incorrectly explain the law to the jurors in a way that hurt your case)?
  
  But you generally can't appeal a jury verdict just because you think they got it wrong. The next level court will only even consider that if you think the jury got the issue so incredibly wrong that no rational assemblage of people could possibly reach the same conclusion. That's a hard mark to hit.
  
  I don't hear anybody crowing about terrible unfairness from the judge (legal error) and nobody's really saying that the jury got it ridiculously wrong. So really, she just loses. That's about it.
  Reply
Read More
CapitalistWarMachineJay Hathaway
3/27/15 6:16pm

didn't possess the... "genetic makeup" to be a VC

What the hell does that mean? And what clown made that their legal argument?
Reply
- Read More
  LtCmndHipsterCapitalistWarMachine
  3/27/15 6:36pm
  They hired and promoted a lot of women, who were put on the stand by the firm, and who testified that they didn't think she had "what it took" to be promoted. "Genetic makeup" means "weren't psychopathic," not "weren't white male."
  Reply
- Read More
  CapitalistWarMachineLtCmndHipster
  3/27/15 6:40pm
  "Genetic makeup" means "makeup of your hereditary genes." I have no idea whether or not this lady has what it takes, but it basically sounds like the defendant's legal argument is that their promotion decision was based on race, not gender. Which is an idiotic argument to make.
  Reply
Read More
LtCmndHipsterJay Hathaway
3/27/15 6:26pm
This case got a lot of press, but it is important not to think of this as a referendum on the problem of a lack of women in tech and VC firms. This is just one plaintiff suing one firm, and the facts weren't particularly good for her.
Reply
- Read More
  zombiepandaLtCmndHipster
  3/27/15 6:46pm
  I appreciate your comment on an intellectual level — and I do want to believe! But on the other hand, it's hard to see how the tech-bro VC firms out there won't look at it as a pat on the back, and tacit approval of how they run their companies. And also hard to see how it wont discourage other women from stepping up and speaking out.
  Reply
- Read More
  LtCmndHipsterzombiepanda
  3/27/15 6:57pm
  If the tech-bro VC firms look at the extremely-public dirty laundry airing that resulted from this case as a GOOD thing, they are beyond hopeless!
  
  I may also be overly optimistic, but I think this case had a lot of positive coverage in media, so maybe women in similar situations will realize that the tide is turning, and that their situations make a much stronger case that Ellen Pao's.
  Reply
Read More
twinturbo2Jay Hathaway
3/27/15 6:08pm
Since she's the interim CEO of Reddit, I just hope she's not reading any comments there today.
Reply
- Read More
  Jay Hathawaytwinturbo2
  3/27/15 6:19pm
  I know I'm not!
  Reply
- Read More
  dontknowdontcare11Jay Hathaway
  3/27/15 6:28pm
  Best comment from Reddit "By all accounts she wasn't good at her job, didn't get along with people, didn't take the good advice she was given. She filed the lawsuit the same month her husband declared bankruptcy, and he's subsequently been accused of fraud. I think the jury got this one right."
  
  Fucking nailed it.
  Reply
Read More
dontknowdontcare11Jay Hathaway
3/27/15 6:22pm
None of this changes the fact that both she and her hedge fund, tax cheat husband are absolute scumbags. She wasn't not promoted because she's a woman, its because she has a very shitty attitude toward anyone she works with. Boo hoo bitch, you lose.

If Gawker defends this 1%er in any shape or form then will expose themselves as huge hypocrites.
Reply
- Read More
  Orlandu7dontknowdontcare11
  3/27/15 6:38pm
  I assume everyone in venture capital is an absolute scumbag, but female absolute scumbags deserve to have a career in venture capital without rampant sexual harassment just as much as male absolute scumbags do.
  Reply
- Read More
  ╰(　´◔　ω　◔ `)╯< Woke and BokeOrlandu7
  3/27/15 6:43pm
  Yeah, she sounds extremely well qualified to be an absolute scumbag, err, VC.
  Reply
Read More
StegoToysJay Hathaway
3/27/15 6:24pm
Disappointed. I've seen better (well, less-worse anyway) behavior at factories, offices, and firms outside SV be grounds for instant termination of all involved parties. The fact this shit went on for so long, that the firm didn't discipline ANYONE involved for the longest time, THEN fired Ellen? Guess all those sexist pigs setup shop in the finance sector. After all, why merely subjugate women in the workplace, when you can get paid princely sums to do so as well?

My views come from watching my Dad lead HR departments for 28+ years. Oh, the stories I cannot legally share due to confidentiality agreements.

If anything, this is exactly why you settle these cases. Even though Ellen lost, she won. Even though the VC firm won, they still lost way worse than Ellen.
Reply
- Read More
  worduptotheworldStegoToys
  3/27/15 9:37pm
  They didn't settle and they won the case. There business did not take a hit. So how did they lose?
  Reply
- Read More
  StegoToysworduptotheworld
  3/27/15 11:12pm
  It's called the court of public opinion, and it's why attorneys on both sides frequently push for an out-of-court settlement before opening arguments even begin. This sort of topic - of minorities, particularly women, in technology - is already heavily jaded in the public eye. When folks look to modern leaders of Silicon Valley (and in fact, the rest of the S&P 500), they overwhelmingly see White Men, with very little representation of other genders or races. Even if Ellen lost the Court Case, her sworn statements under oath are incredibly damaging for her former employer. Potential employment prospects - even those who might be the next moguls of their profession - will view the environment described as hostile to them or those they care about, and instead seek alternative employment. In many previous cases I've witnessed, even when the employer wins the court battle, the loss of talent within the company bleeds slowly and steadily for years after the victory, as those who interacted with the plantiff usually bail first, then take their associates and colleagues with them over time.
  
  Ellen may not earn a dime from this, but the damage is done to her former employer. It has been painted as a hostile, negative environment to work in, with several key leaders being described under oath as contributing factors to the situation. Companies seeking VC funds will be less likely to court that company for investment, and people looking for employment will be less likely to put their talents to work for a company who gets sued and openly exposed at trial like this (because, let's face it, the testimony was overwhelmingly negative even if not necessarily illegal).
  
  I've seen this time and time again in other industries. It will happen here too, at least until the story either fades from view for a length of time, or the company fires all of those involved and makes a good faith effort to improve its culture, regardless of the outcome of the court case.
  Reply
Read More
amirightladiesJay Hathaway
3/27/15 6:28pm
What kind of "genetic makeup" does one need to be a VC?
Reply
- Read More
  ╰(　´◔　ω　◔ `)╯< Woke and Bokeamirightladies
  3/27/15 6:45pm
  
  GIF
  
  Reply
- Read More
  itisansplitseconddecisionamirightladies
  3/27/15 6:47pm
  1. Be white
  
  2. Be male
  Reply
Read More
John StarJay Hathaway
3/28/15 2:01am
An extremely rich and powerful NYC based attorney specializing in International Law told me years ago, over a bottle of Midleton VR and dinner in Cairo, that his entire assessment of American corporate management was very succinct: On grid or off grid. Go along, get along... or you're off the grid. Sadly, if the jury assumed that Pao was trying to buck that system, she was SOOL.

Genderdis was all she had going against corpman, and so, her case was doomed, (and bore fruit as such.) The: If/Then scenario. Score enough points, you win.

It's one thing if you are a specialist, a consultant, an employee, or a coder/programmer (claiming genderdis), you can with beat corpman with legal precedence. It's another to be in corporate management and say that you were dissed. Fundamentally, there are no hard core legal judgements to work with.

The fact that her relationship went sour did not help: 'Muddy water' (as lawyers like to say).

She definitely got screwed. Yes indeed, and I'm sure that the jury understood the basics of her case. But, weak point scoring by her attorneys, character assassination by the defense, and no legal precedence back-mapping her case, the jury had no choice but to follow the legal guidelines put forward by the KPC&B team.

This is fucked up, and this scenario has to change.
Reply
Read More
KaidogJay Hathaway
3/28/15 4:43pm
I followed the re/code coverage somewhat consistently, maybe every other day. This was really a janus-type, roller-coaster of a story. On one day, I'd found myself entirely empathetic with Ms. Pao. But others' testimony had me rethinking how others might not share Ms. Pao's perspective on events.

No doubt Ms. Pao believes that Kleiner Perkins wronged her deeply. No question there's a terrific gender problem in Silicon Valley. I expected the trial would be a showcase in sexism, and parts of it were. Kleiner Perkins had really subpar structures in place re: personnel issues, so a good chunk of this mess is the firm's fault. But I also came away from the closing arguments thinking that Ms. Pao's workplace expectations and personality contributed to the rough time she had.

Re/code's coverage is worth reading. Their reporters did a great job.
Reply
Read More
Jay HathawayJay Hathaway
3/28/15 12:11am
Updated the story to note that Pao also lost the fourth count two hours later.
Reply