Bitterness, Anger And Betrayal At MySpace(techcrunch.com)
techcrunch.com
Bitterness, Anger And Betrayal At MySpace
http://techcrunch.com/2011/01/11/bitterness-anger-and-betrayal-at-myspace/
21 comments
I've been a consultant most all of my life -- mainly because I don't trust stock-price-driven companies to be honorable or to know what the heck they are doing. I love all the people I've worked with: it's just the organizations and business models they create that's so crazy.
The nice thing about being a consultant is that you do something they like, they pay you. Repeat and rinse. Pretty soon you're out on the street looking for a new gig. If they don't like you, you don't get paid (and you're on the street quicker).
It's a very simple and easily understandable deal. And being on the street is not the end of something or a failure -- it's a chance to go on an even greater adventure.
I even had one government employee who had a high level job at a place we all know tell me "Look. This is easy. You do all the work. Solve all the hard problems. I'll take credit for it."
Sounded good to me. Finished the job early and went on to something else. He's still there doing the same thing.
There are a lot of implied or assumed promises in corporate full-time jobs. It's been my experience that you shouldn't trust any of them -- even from people who are trying really hard to do the right thing. IT is just a business where everything is always changing. It's not like any other business I've ever seen
The nice thing about being a consultant is that you do something they like, they pay you. Repeat and rinse. Pretty soon you're out on the street looking for a new gig. If they don't like you, you don't get paid (and you're on the street quicker).
It's a very simple and easily understandable deal. And being on the street is not the end of something or a failure -- it's a chance to go on an even greater adventure.
I even had one government employee who had a high level job at a place we all know tell me "Look. This is easy. You do all the work. Solve all the hard problems. I'll take credit for it."
Sounded good to me. Finished the job early and went on to something else. He's still there doing the same thing.
There are a lot of implied or assumed promises in corporate full-time jobs. It's been my experience that you shouldn't trust any of them -- even from people who are trying really hard to do the right thing. IT is just a business where everything is always changing. It's not like any other business I've ever seen
Consulting is like running though: the minute you get tired and stop a minute or two, your velocity is gone - no more money coming in. A functioning business is more like a bicycle - it's not like you're just along for the ride, you have to work, but you can coast a little bit now and then. For instance, vacations. That's true for both bosses and employees.
I enjoy consulting too, but it leaves me with the feeling of not building or being part of something for the future... if that makes sense.
I enjoy consulting too, but it leaves me with the feeling of not building or being part of something for the future... if that makes sense.
I enjoy consulting too, but it leaves me with the feeling of not building or being part of something for the future... if that makes sense.
Here's how I'd fix that: start building a set of reusable components which you own the property to and license it to your contractees. If it gets useful enough and you need the money, you might even be able to start charging money for it. Think of whatever you're building as the platform of the future ;)
Here's how I'd fix that: start building a set of reusable components which you own the property to and license it to your contractees. If it gets useful enough and you need the money, you might even be able to start charging money for it. Think of whatever you're building as the platform of the future ;)
Worst part about consulting (for me) was having to be gone from my family so much -- and the lack of permanent friendships at work.
The part about not being able to slow down or you die? I actually like that part. Technology is always changing, and I like the fact that I'm constantly challenged to find real, solid value in what I'm learning or doing. Keeps me on my toes. Although I freely admit it's not for everybody.
I coast by taking as much time as I want between gigs.
I have family members who are "normal" -- they want a 9-5 job, long-term responsibilities and friendships, and they want to forget all about work when they punch out. The don't want things to change, and they want promises they can rely on for the future. They want somebody else to worry about things changing. I respect that. I'm just not that way. I tell folks that consulting has probably ruined me for life as far as ever being a useful company man.
The part about not being able to slow down or you die? I actually like that part. Technology is always changing, and I like the fact that I'm constantly challenged to find real, solid value in what I'm learning or doing. Keeps me on my toes. Although I freely admit it's not for everybody.
I coast by taking as much time as I want between gigs.
I have family members who are "normal" -- they want a 9-5 job, long-term responsibilities and friendships, and they want to forget all about work when they punch out. The don't want things to change, and they want promises they can rely on for the future. They want somebody else to worry about things changing. I respect that. I'm just not that way. I tell folks that consulting has probably ruined me for life as far as ever being a useful company man.
I really get not wanting to do a 9-5, but on the other hand, the more I get long-term responsibilities of my own, like a child, the more I think trying to build a business of some kind is, long term, better than consulting, in terms of doing stuff on your own terms.
As you age, you get more experience, but are less able to pound out tons of code, and spend tons of time keeping up with the latest thing.
As you age, you get more experience, but are less able to pound out tons of code, and spend tons of time keeping up with the latest thing.
I think you've just accurately described why I'm on HN so much and why I've spent the last several years learning about startups instead of .NET 7.0
And also why I now help teams out instead of being the 18-hour code monkey. Still love coding, but you reach the natural limits of these things and have to move on. You also reach the point where you have to start thinking long-term instead of short-term.
EDIT: I'd add that I'd much rather be the guy who knows a dozen different languages and databases, has had experience in a lot of industries, and is used to working hard and saving, yadda yadda -- I'd rather be that guy looking to get into startups than the guy who took the 4-year degree, punched the clock everyday for years, trusted his company to take care of him, and is now wondering where his future went and whom to blame.
And also why I now help teams out instead of being the 18-hour code monkey. Still love coding, but you reach the natural limits of these things and have to move on. You also reach the point where you have to start thinking long-term instead of short-term.
EDIT: I'd add that I'd much rather be the guy who knows a dozen different languages and databases, has had experience in a lot of industries, and is used to working hard and saving, yadda yadda -- I'd rather be that guy looking to get into startups than the guy who took the 4-year degree, punched the clock everyday for years, trusted his company to take care of him, and is now wondering where his future went and whom to blame.
I think we pretty much agree: I think my writing is mostly to encourage younger people to think about building something rather than just going off into consulting.
Ah, but in your analogy, salaried employment would be like walking, since it moves you forward more slowly (in terms of money) and is more continuous.
If you're running, you can stop every once in a while, sometimes for long enough to get a cup of coffee, and still stay ahead of the guy who set off walking at the same time as you.
If you're running, you can stop every once in a while, sometimes for long enough to get a cup of coffee, and still stay ahead of the guy who set off walking at the same time as you.
I'm not going to try and push the analogy too far, but in good jobs (I think they're rarer, but do exist), you can take vacations, get sick, and things like that. With consulting, the minute you're not working or hustling to find new gigs, you're not going anywhere.
Right, that's the good part about consulting, the honesty. The agreement is "Pay me roughly twice what you pay everybody else, and I'll deal with all the benefits stuff myself".
Also included in that price tag is the ability to be let go at any time for any reason. In an ironic way, that actually tips the terms further to the site of consulting, since the reality is that salaried employees will also be let go at any time when the company decides to do so.
So yeah, you have to save some money. Fortunately, they give you a lot extra so that you can.
Also included in that price tag is the ability to be let go at any time for any reason. In an ironic way, that actually tips the terms further to the site of consulting, since the reality is that salaried employees will also be let go at any time when the company decides to do so.
So yeah, you have to save some money. Fortunately, they give you a lot extra so that you can.
Hope you caught the Tom Rossi interview on Mixergy :)
Agreed. Awesome interview! Here's the link: http://mixergy.com/tom-rossi-molehill-interview/
I even had one government employee who had a high level job at a place we all know tell me "Look. This is easy. You do all the work. Solve all the hard problems. I'll take credit for it."
The only thing that is missing from this Don Draper-esque speech is the "That's what the money is for" line, as that's what consultants are supposed to do.
The only thing that is missing from this Don Draper-esque speech is the "That's what the money is for" line, as that's what consultants are supposed to do.
>It's a very simple and easily understandable deal.
This is also one of the big reasons I switched to consulting. I find it a more honest way to work. My career advancement is completely in my own hands and not tied to a specific company. There is no tit-for-maybe-possibly-someday-tat involved.
This is also one of the big reasons I switched to consulting. I find it a more honest way to work. My career advancement is completely in my own hands and not tied to a specific company. There is no tit-for-maybe-possibly-someday-tat involved.
> There are a lot of implied or assumed promises in corporate full-time jobs
There is a lack of unions and labor laws.
bye karma.
There is a lack of unions and labor laws.
bye karma.
The lack of unions is due to culture rather than labour laws.
I've spent a lot of time trying to convince IT people to start a voluntary union for their own benefit. In a word, they are too competitive and naieve to make it happen.
IT employees in general could double their average salaries without resorting to labour laws just by starting voluntary unions and doing a modicum of collective bargaining.
Instead they allow themselves to be divided and conquered and they even hide their salaries from co-workers which benefits no one aside from management.
Ideologically, I am against government-enforced unions.
However I am very much in favour of voluntary unions and there is lots of evidence that they can work especially when they behave in reasonable ways that don't threaten the existence of companies. Some corporations will prefer to hire from unions for a variety of reasons including less variability in work quality and higher morale.
Anyway collective bargaining does not have to be enforced in law to be effective.
The real issue is that the most talented and resourceful people in society tend to be the ones who become owners, and they use their talent and influence to convince IT employees that unions are bad.
The average programmer is stubbornly anti-union for no logical reason - the reason is that he's brainwashed by the strong opinions of industry leaders who don't want to pay him what he's worth.
I've spent a lot of time trying to convince IT people to start a voluntary union for their own benefit. In a word, they are too competitive and naieve to make it happen.
IT employees in general could double their average salaries without resorting to labour laws just by starting voluntary unions and doing a modicum of collective bargaining.
Instead they allow themselves to be divided and conquered and they even hide their salaries from co-workers which benefits no one aside from management.
Ideologically, I am against government-enforced unions.
However I am very much in favour of voluntary unions and there is lots of evidence that they can work especially when they behave in reasonable ways that don't threaten the existence of companies. Some corporations will prefer to hire from unions for a variety of reasons including less variability in work quality and higher morale.
Anyway collective bargaining does not have to be enforced in law to be effective.
The real issue is that the most talented and resourceful people in society tend to be the ones who become owners, and they use their talent and influence to convince IT employees that unions are bad.
The average programmer is stubbornly anti-union for no logical reason - the reason is that he's brainwashed by the strong opinions of industry leaders who don't want to pay him what he's worth.
I'm anti-union for a lot of good reasons. They cost money, the leadership is often corrupt, they will sacrifice a part for what they believe is the good of the whole, and they promote seniority over merit. I don't want to be part of another organization that I don't have the time or desire to take an active part in. Workers in our industry have enough skill to get good compensation and benefits.
I don't think there's been one situation in my career where an union would have helped me.
I don't think there's been one situation in my career where an union would have helped me.
It doesn't even have to be a union in the way you think of it.
It could just be an organization that exerts power on a wide scale without directly negotiating on behalf of the professional.
Look at the difference between Doctors associations, Lawyer associations, and computer science associations.
The most powerful medical authority is a collective body run by doctors, NOT run by the employers of doctors. This is because doctors as a collective have banded together and decided to take collective power.
Computer scientists on the other hand choose not to do this and so the powerful groups are run by corporate interests.
Who represents the voice of the collective programmer? No one really.
A body of software professionals similar to the AMA would raise salaries and provide many other benefits without having to directly negotiate on behalf of the employees.
One thing it could facilitate for instance would be scientific and wide-scale income information sharing which alone would raise the pay of every single software professional. It would level the playing field in negotiations and allow software professionals to capture more of their own productivity.
It could just be an organization that exerts power on a wide scale without directly negotiating on behalf of the professional.
Look at the difference between Doctors associations, Lawyer associations, and computer science associations.
The most powerful medical authority is a collective body run by doctors, NOT run by the employers of doctors. This is because doctors as a collective have banded together and decided to take collective power.
Computer scientists on the other hand choose not to do this and so the powerful groups are run by corporate interests.
Who represents the voice of the collective programmer? No one really.
A body of software professionals similar to the AMA would raise salaries and provide many other benefits without having to directly negotiate on behalf of the employees.
One thing it could facilitate for instance would be scientific and wide-scale income information sharing which alone would raise the pay of every single software professional. It would level the playing field in negotiations and allow software professionals to capture more of their own productivity.
You are anti-most-current-unions but does that mean you are against the idea of a union? Unions have not always been such bloated top heavy pigs.
> Workers in our industry have enough skill > to get good compensation and benefits.
This is true but I've found that there is a lot of hidden costs to being a salaried employee, in the form of a lot of pressure to "get things done" so other people can benefit (make more sales). If you are part of a revunue sharing program then that's different, but revenue sharing doesn't seem to be that common.
> Workers in our industry have enough skill > to get good compensation and benefits.
This is true but I've found that there is a lot of hidden costs to being a salaried employee, in the form of a lot of pressure to "get things done" so other people can benefit (make more sales). If you are part of a revunue sharing program then that's different, but revenue sharing doesn't seem to be that common.
I'm stubbornly anti-union for this reason:
https://www.surveymonkey.com/sr.aspx?sm=QpfonhAfJ6Q_2b96Izwz...
Chart 16 is a breakdown of salaries for StackOverflow users, nearly all of which are so low that a good developer should be insulted to be offered it. Where, on that chart, do you suppose the Union would decide to set my fair salary based on my experience in the trade? 60k? 80k? 100k?
No thanks. I'll stick to the free market.
https://www.surveymonkey.com/sr.aspx?sm=QpfonhAfJ6Q_2b96Izwz...
Chart 16 is a breakdown of salaries for StackOverflow users, nearly all of which are so low that a good developer should be insulted to be offered it. Where, on that chart, do you suppose the Union would decide to set my fair salary based on my experience in the trade? 60k? 80k? 100k?
No thanks. I'll stick to the free market.
1. A rising tide floats all boats.
2. Unions don't have to fit the rigid model you have in your head of the UAW. They can still allow for inequality of pay negotiated on an individual level, but after an initial negotiation on a collective level. Basically you can design the union to still pay higher performers what they are worth and pay low performers a lot less - but with everyone's salaries being increased relative to management.
2. Unions don't have to fit the rigid model you have in your head of the UAW. They can still allow for inequality of pay negotiated on an individual level, but after an initial negotiation on a collective level. Basically you can design the union to still pay higher performers what they are worth and pay low performers a lot less - but with everyone's salaries being increased relative to management.
> 2. Unions don't have to fit the rigid model you have in your head of the UAW.
Maybe not, but let's see some examples that have been significantly better for over 10 years. (And no, teachers unions aren't better.)
I agree that it isn't obvious that unions must necessarily be a disaster in the US, but that's a theory argument and you know what they say about theory and practice....
Maybe not, but let's see some examples that have been significantly better for over 10 years. (And no, teachers unions aren't better.)
I agree that it isn't obvious that unions must necessarily be a disaster in the US, but that's a theory argument and you know what they say about theory and practice....
IMO american unions are a disaster because of government intervention.
In other countries there are successful unions in industries and contexts where the government plays little role.
In other countries there are successful unions in industries and contexts where the government plays little role.
> IMO american unions are a disaster because of government intervention.
Given that, would you recommend that programmers join unions in the US? If so, why?
Given that, would you recommend that programmers join unions in the US? If so, why?
Programmers should organize.
The precise form of organization can be grown organically to fit the situation, whether you call it a "union" or just as "association"
The point is that programmers should organize so that they can improve the pay and general standard of life of every programmer and so they can increase the quality and value of every programmers output and the esteem of the profession in general.
Programmers should treat their profession with the same seriousness that Doctors, Lawyers, Psychologists, Actuaries, etc treat their professions. They create professional bodies that stand up for their interests whether it is by lobbying, marketing, bargaining, etc.
The precise form of organization can be grown organically to fit the situation, whether you call it a "union" or just as "association"
The point is that programmers should organize so that they can improve the pay and general standard of life of every programmer and so they can increase the quality and value of every programmers output and the esteem of the profession in general.
Programmers should treat their profession with the same seriousness that Doctors, Lawyers, Psychologists, Actuaries, etc treat their professions. They create professional bodies that stand up for their interests whether it is by lobbying, marketing, bargaining, etc.
> The precise form of organization can be grown organically to fit the situation, whether you call it a "union" or just as "association"
How is it that calling something an association will avoid the problems from being a union in the US?
> The point is that programmers should organize so that they can improve the pay
It's poor form to assume your conclusion.
You keep bringing up doctors and lawyers (and you misstate what their professional organizations actually do and overstate their influence), yet your goals for a "programmers association" are more akin to those of teachers unions.
I understand why you want to avoid the comparison with teachers unions, but the only legitmate way to do so is to stop pushing the same thing.
Saying "this will be different" isn't enough. Same means, same ends.
How is it that calling something an association will avoid the problems from being a union in the US?
> The point is that programmers should organize so that they can improve the pay
It's poor form to assume your conclusion.
You keep bringing up doctors and lawyers (and you misstate what their professional organizations actually do and overstate their influence), yet your goals for a "programmers association" are more akin to those of teachers unions.
I understand why you want to avoid the comparison with teachers unions, but the only legitmate way to do so is to stop pushing the same thing.
Saying "this will be different" isn't enough. Same means, same ends.
As a gag, years ago, I started a 'union' at a small software vendor/consultancy I worked at. Our first demand? Lower salaries.
in brazil we have unions (sadly mandatory because of labor laws). it never had a single say on my salary.
but for professions abused by the industry, they did set up a minimum wage they would agree to accept, raising the overall pay among the entire profession.
and i have no idea what charts 16 does to help you point.
but for professions abused by the industry, they did set up a minimum wage they would agree to accept, raising the overall pay among the entire profession.
and i have no idea what charts 16 does to help you point.
you have excellent points and i agree with every one of them.
i said unions AND labor laws. i also do not agree they should mix. but the former should try it's best to influence the later.
i said unions AND labor laws. i also do not agree they should mix. but the former should try it's best to influence the later.
I'm not one of the libertarian crowd, so what I say below is not just a knee-jerk response, and in any case I don't really wish to pursue these sorts of discussions (politics) here, because they end badly.
Suffice it to say though, that you can't summarize the problem and solution in "lack of unions and labor laws". Italy, where I reside, has both, especially the latter, and they are quite detrimental in many ways.
It's a complex issue with many factors, and likely has both regulatory, cultural and economic causes and solutions, some of which are easy to change and some that aren't.
Suffice it to say though, that you can't summarize the problem and solution in "lack of unions and labor laws". Italy, where I reside, has both, especially the latter, and they are quite detrimental in many ways.
It's a complex issue with many factors, and likely has both regulatory, cultural and economic causes and solutions, some of which are easy to change and some that aren't.
There needs to be balance. God knows we don't have that in the U.S.A these days. But maybe we only have ourselves to blame.
My grandfather, with no education, came from Italy had 3 kids a stay at home wife and a home. I on the hand am very educated and skilled and can barely afford a two bedroom apartment.
Somethings changed.
My grandfather, with no education, came from Italy had 3 kids a stay at home wife and a home. I on the hand am very educated and skilled and can barely afford a two bedroom apartment.
Somethings changed.
Yep, I know. The cover-up culture in the companies that develop such bosses certainly don't help. That is one reason why it is harmful.
He and his executive team had just somehow driven hundreds of people to work hard for months, giving 20 hour days, even 48 hour sleepless stints...
If put in more work than what your cash salary is worth, then you are investing. And sometimes investors get no return. Invest with caution.
If put in more work than what your cash salary is worth, then you are investing. And sometimes investors get no return. Invest with caution.
Jack Welch once said something to the effect of "On Friday, after you receive your paycheck, you and the company are even." Corporate America seems to have mostly embraced this. I'm perfectly fine with that as long as all parties are on the same page.
You would have to be a singular company to make me trust any promise, explicit or implicit, about monetary or non-monetary compensation which had a time horizon longer than a paycheck cycle. I'm not intending on ever being a salaryman again, but if I were, an American company which even suggested the desirability of a deathmarch would receive a firm handshake and my two-weeks notice immediately. (There are quite a few Japanese companies where I'd actually trust the company to make good on its side of The Offer. It's still not a good offer, but it's at least understandable to me that someone might take them up on it.)
You would have to be a singular company to make me trust any promise, explicit or implicit, about monetary or non-monetary compensation which had a time horizon longer than a paycheck cycle. I'm not intending on ever being a salaryman again, but if I were, an American company which even suggested the desirability of a deathmarch would receive a firm handshake and my two-weeks notice immediately. (There are quite a few Japanese companies where I'd actually trust the company to make good on its side of The Offer. It's still not a good offer, but it's at least understandable to me that someone might take them up on it.)
Just curious, why such a distinction between an American and a Japanese company?
The commitment of Japanese companies to lifetime employment has never been universal across the workforce, and it is weakening, but for salarymen (what most HN readers employed for salary at a megacorp would be), it is not unreasonable to expect the company to durably honor The Offer regardless of the company's financial performance, changes in management, etc.
The Offer -- which underpins a whole lot of social life here -- goes something like this: if you swear yourself to us body and soul (see my numerous posts about work/life balance here), we guarantee you against most forms of risk. You will receive steady paychecks, predictable raises/promotions, a suite of benefits, and the unwavering loyalty (and social support) of the company until the day you die.
The Offer -- which underpins a whole lot of social life here -- goes something like this: if you swear yourself to us body and soul (see my numerous posts about work/life balance here), we guarantee you against most forms of risk. You will receive steady paychecks, predictable raises/promotions, a suite of benefits, and the unwavering loyalty (and social support) of the company until the day you die.
The salaryman culture isn't dead in Japan; and that culture came as a bargain - loyalty was a two-way street, as the saying goes. So he would consider working without contractual guarantees because those corporations still have a track record of delivering without contractual guarantees.
Whereas American corporations haven't had that spirit for a long time (replacing it with a letter-of-the-law attitude) and a number apparently actively seek to exploit their employees' delusions that some might still have that spirit, as this MySpace example perhaps illustrates.
Whereas American corporations haven't had that spirit for a long time (replacing it with a letter-of-the-law attitude) and a number apparently actively seek to exploit their employees' delusions that some might still have that spirit, as this MySpace example perhaps illustrates.
I'm not sure to the degree it's still true but it was once true that in Japan a job was essentially for life. Not only did the employee have loyalty to the company but that loyalty was reciprocated.
Like I said, it's probably not quite as much as once was but there is no doubt remnants of that still there.
Chris Dixon eloquently articulated the types of work relationships that exist more commonly in the developed world. Broadly, there is the transactional view (as per Jack Welch) or the collective view (eg a startup where you have some equity stake in the company).
See http://cdixon.org/2009/10/23/twelve-months-notice/
Like I said, it's probably not quite as much as once was but there is no doubt remnants of that still there.
Chris Dixon eloquently articulated the types of work relationships that exist more commonly in the developed world. Broadly, there is the transactional view (as per Jack Welch) or the collective view (eg a startup where you have some equity stake in the company).
See http://cdixon.org/2009/10/23/twelve-months-notice/
The culture is still there, although it depends a lot of the companies - corporate culture takes a whole new dimension in Japan, and someone working in Sony or Panasonic could as well work in different countries.
To give an example of what companies expect from people (told first hand from people I know personally, or even witnessed myself): you may be asked to work overseas (which most Japanese hate) in a matter of days. That is, the company will tell you: could you please work overseas for one year starting next week ? You can say no, once, if you don't mind having no career in the company. Worse, I have seen the situation where people were given that deal, to be said the day of the depart that no, they won't be needed overseas overall. Note that those people often have wife, children, etc...
To give an example of what companies expect from people (told first hand from people I know personally, or even witnessed myself): you may be asked to work overseas (which most Japanese hate) in a matter of days. That is, the company will tell you: could you please work overseas for one year starting next week ? You can say no, once, if you don't mind having no career in the company. Worse, I have seen the situation where people were given that deal, to be said the day of the depart that no, they won't be needed overseas overall. Note that those people often have wife, children, etc...
Maybe, but this is in stark contrast to the courage of Pixar's bosses in saving their employees that recently was on the front page. Easy to be cynical about life in BigCorp and the vicissitudes of your bosses, but doesn't make it any less wrong to treat people who trust you this way.
I think it's a telling contrast when compared against the success of the respective companies.
> the courage of Pixar's bosses in saving their employees that recently was on the front page
It can also be a rational decision. If you believe the layoffs being imposed on you will cripple the company, it's better to leave the failure to your successor.
It can also be a rational decision. If you believe the layoffs being imposed on you will cripple the company, it's better to leave the failure to your successor.
Exactly, and if you aren't happy, why not quit? You can't tell me that people at MySpace with technical skill couldn't find a better job somewhere else.
If you were a skilled technical worker at Myspace, wouldn't you have already left by now?
And the hard working, loyal employees that worked their butts off...will be looking for jobs.
If you're a MySpace engineer that was laid off, hit me up: [email protected]. I'm a software engineer at a .NET startup in El Segundo, CA that's hiring.
If you're a MySpace engineer that was laid off, hit me up: [email protected]. I'm a software engineer at a .NET startup in El Segundo, CA that's hiring.
Hahaha .NET /jk
Three things:
1) I really feel for those guys. Technology is like that: one day you're on top and the next day you're on the street
2) Work as hard as you can at something and never regret it. The only person that can make you feel tricked into working 20-hour days is yourself. Don't do that to yourself.
3) Bitterness isn't going to make it any better. Sucks to hear that, yes, but what you need now most of all is a positive attitude and motivation to go out and kick ass. Might take some time to get that back, but work on that instead of chewing on what some C-level jerk is planning on doing or has done to a company you're no longer with.
Thinking about my comments some, there's probably a very good reason I never had a job as a counselor. Sometimes what folks really need is a beer and somebody to complain to. Sadly, I'm probably not that guy.
1) I really feel for those guys. Technology is like that: one day you're on top and the next day you're on the street
2) Work as hard as you can at something and never regret it. The only person that can make you feel tricked into working 20-hour days is yourself. Don't do that to yourself.
3) Bitterness isn't going to make it any better. Sucks to hear that, yes, but what you need now most of all is a positive attitude and motivation to go out and kick ass. Might take some time to get that back, but work on that instead of chewing on what some C-level jerk is planning on doing or has done to a company you're no longer with.
Thinking about my comments some, there's probably a very good reason I never had a job as a counselor. Sometimes what folks really need is a beer and somebody to complain to. Sadly, I'm probably not that guy.
If anyone's interested, an engineer at Myspace who thought they were being laid off (but turned out not to be) is doing an IAmA on Reddit: http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/f09rk/iama_myspace_emp...
I know an engineer who was working in a failing company in post-communist Eastern Europe. The decline of the company took more than a year, in which time salaries were cut, sometimes pay was delayed for months or not given at all, the owners were visibly transferring their personal wealth abroad (as well as moving their family members). This engineer stayed at the company, despite some good offers from elsewhere, to the point when heating was cut off from the company and he had to sit in office in winter jacket, and in the last weeks he brought printing paper from home. Finally the company went bankrupt and he took the earlier job offer at a salary lower than what was offered before.
Morale: watch out for signs of Stockholm syndrome, because it can be real.
Morale: watch out for signs of Stockholm syndrome, because it can be real.
These are some of the tamest allegations of corporate wrong doing ever made. The worst of them is that Mike Jones waited to fire people as long as possible instead of firing them in time for Christmas.
I hope the author of this 'email from a reader' gets a cut of the ad revenue from its publication in whole, or they'll have two reasons to feel bitter.
TC--
TC--
It saddens me to reflect that every time I felt like a company was with was failing, and that we might recover, ultimately, we failed. So, the most rational advice I could give any employee would be: if you're invested in the success of your employer, and they seem to be failing, leave. And the CEO giving locker room inspirational speeches is the surest sign that it's time to stroll on.
But, how does that square with the idea of pulling together and making any endeavor work? Is the lesson to only be a founder? Morally, doesn't that mean: never employ anyone?
I don't know, I just feel for those laid off this week. 'Cause is really sucks.
But, how does that square with the idea of pulling together and making any endeavor work? Is the lesson to only be a founder? Morally, doesn't that mean: never employ anyone?
I don't know, I just feel for those laid off this week. 'Cause is really sucks.
A living example of the MacLeod hierarchy and the Gervais Principle at play. Psychopathic executives managed to groom their whole staff into clueless lemmings to better abuse them.
The Gervais principle was defined by Venkat (Venkatesh Rao) in a series of articles published in his blog. They should be well known around here, but here they are for those who missed them. The insight of these essays is amazing, and worth much more than the time it'll take you to read them.
.
__________
The Gervais Principle, Or The Office According to “The Office” --- http://www.ribbonfarm.com/2009/10/07/the-gervais-principle-o...
The Gervais Principle II: Posturetalk, Powertalk, Babytalk and Gametalk --- http://www.ribbonfarm.com/2009/11/11/the-gervais-principle-i...
The Gervais Principle III: The Curse of Development --- http://www.ribbonfarm.com/2010/04/14/the-gervais-principle-i...
The Gervais Principle IV: Wonderful Human Beings --- http://www.ribbonfarm.com/2010/10/14/the-gervais-principle-i...
.
_________
Related considerations by the same author.
.
The Genealogy of the Gervais Principle --- http://www.ribbonfarm.com/2010/02/04/the-genealogy-of-the-ge...
Random Promotions and the Gervais Principle --- http://www.ribbonfarm.com/2009/12/13/random-promotions-and-t...
Conceptual Metaphors (Mashable), Gervais Principle (Fugitive Philosophy) --- http://www.ribbonfarm.com/2010/01/13/conceptual-metaphors-ma...
Two Interesting Gervais Principle Follow-Ups -- http://www.ribbonfarm.com/2010/05/06/two-interesting-gervais...
The Gervais principle was defined by Venkat (Venkatesh Rao) in a series of articles published in his blog. They should be well known around here, but here they are for those who missed them. The insight of these essays is amazing, and worth much more than the time it'll take you to read them.
.
__________
The Gervais Principle, Or The Office According to “The Office” --- http://www.ribbonfarm.com/2009/10/07/the-gervais-principle-o...
The Gervais Principle II: Posturetalk, Powertalk, Babytalk and Gametalk --- http://www.ribbonfarm.com/2009/11/11/the-gervais-principle-i...
The Gervais Principle III: The Curse of Development --- http://www.ribbonfarm.com/2010/04/14/the-gervais-principle-i...
The Gervais Principle IV: Wonderful Human Beings --- http://www.ribbonfarm.com/2010/10/14/the-gervais-principle-i...
.
_________
Related considerations by the same author.
.
The Genealogy of the Gervais Principle --- http://www.ribbonfarm.com/2010/02/04/the-genealogy-of-the-ge...
Random Promotions and the Gervais Principle --- http://www.ribbonfarm.com/2009/12/13/random-promotions-and-t...
Conceptual Metaphors (Mashable), Gervais Principle (Fugitive Philosophy) --- http://www.ribbonfarm.com/2010/01/13/conceptual-metaphors-ma...
Two Interesting Gervais Principle Follow-Ups -- http://www.ribbonfarm.com/2010/05/06/two-interesting-gervais...
Something I learned early in my career, "never be any more loyal to your company than your company can be loyal to you".
People need to look out for themselves. You need to have your own thoughts on the future of your company and your own thoughts on what is and isn't worth doing.
Exactly. And who didn't see the demise of Myspace for the last couple of years? Surely from the inside you'd be acutely aware of the situation.
Further proof of MySpace as a failed company is that one cannot delete one's profile from the site without jumping through an exhaustive series of hoops which culminates in adding the words "Delete my profile" to your profile.
Yes they should do what Facebook does, where you just click the big red delete button on your profile and it's done!
I know this is sarcasm, but the point is not so much the profile deletion itself. It's the user experience of the process. Normal user goes to remove their Facebook profile, heck even I go to delete my Facebook profile, and sure I haven't deleted it, but I'm left more or less neutral. Try deleting a MySpace profile and see how you feel after the process.
That is rather obtuse, but some sites don't even let you delete your account/profile at all.
(Like the one we're currently on.)
(Like the one we're currently on.)
I'll reiterate what I stated below, it is not the fact that you cannot delete the profile, it is the user experience of trying to do so. Try it yourself, let me know what you think.
I actually had a MySpace account back in the day, and I had completely forgotten about that deletion process. I agree that it's far from the best UX.
I feel like those unwanted profiles will disappear soon enough.
That's changed.
It used to be (as of summer 2008), much easier to delete a profile from myspace.
Yep, and that is exactly why I made the statement in regards to it indicating a failing company. The user experience is falling apart fast.
http://techcrunch.com/2011/01/11/bitterness-anger-and-betray... -- there's a comment there which describes myspace's acquisition as, well, a failure.
I've never worked for MySpace or Fox, but I've worked for folks who had just come from MySpace / Fox and I have to say it was really apparent how ingrained into the culture pulling all-nighters, working through weekends and holidays etc was.
And yet the rate of innovation was glacial. Hours aren't always the answer, they might be the problem.
These guys knew they were working for Rupert Murdoch, right?
because General Electric or Disney would never do such a thing!
This is MySpace's dot com moment. To me it seems highly unlikely, short of pulling a rabbit out of a hat, that MySpace will survive for very much longer. The niche which they occupied has been successfully colonised by Facebook, and there are plenty of other sites where you can go to listen to and buy music, or watch music videos.
[deleted]
>Bitterness, Anger And Betrayal At MySpace
Sometimes you can just tell a Michael Arrington headline before you even click.
Sometimes you can just tell a Michael Arrington headline before you even click.
Really sounds strikingly similar to some of the management practices and employee abuse that went down during the decline of TechCrunch's parent company, AOL.
Wow, this really made me feel terrible. I had no idea that that's how the deal with the layoffs went down, but it all makes sense now after reading that.
And the website myspace looks down to me. Is it?
Pardon me for being cynical, but just a little personal experience:
Sorry to say, moral of the story: