this post was submitted on 16 Aug 2023
765 points (93.9% liked)

Technology

74003 readers
3035 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] DrPop@lemmy.one 34 points 2 years ago (2 children)

What a corporate answer that says, now that the public knows we suck I guess we need to address it.

[–] TDCN@feddit.dk 33 points 2 years ago (6 children)

What kind of answer would you rather have. I'm seriously asking what should the comment have been in order for you to be happy?

[–] Anonymousllama@lemmy.world 20 points 2 years ago

I feel a good majority of people are just in the outrage phase and there's literally no response that would have been good enough.

[–] GigglyBobble@kbin.social 11 points 2 years ago (2 children)

There is no way. Too many corp answers that were nothing but words have been published before for anyone to not be cynic about it.

[–] RealJoL@feddit.de 10 points 2 years ago (1 children)

To be honest, I can't remember the last time I have read a statement that talked about bringing in third party investigators. Is that common for corporations?

[–] whofearsthenight@lemm.ee 1 points 2 years ago

It's usually something agreed to in a settlement or in a power dynamic situation like Apple telling a supplier they want a third party audit. It also happens when you have no intention of ever publishing the findings. That they're proactively doing it with the obvious obligation to publish what is found and the consequence of it is most def a show of positive character. I think ya boy Hanlon is right when it comes to leadership at LMG - never attribute to malice that which can be explained by stupidity.

[–] emax_gomax@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago

This, but maybe not after what we got from Linus to begin with. This is clearly damage control and also is probable detracting from what limus actually feels which is f*ck you I can do what I want and I don't owe you anything.

[–] DrPop@lemmy.one 1 points 2 years ago

Oh I'm fine with the answer. With the information I gathered that same day this is probably the best they can do now. I would like to know more info about this outside investigation.

[–] bluekieran@lemmy.world -3 points 2 years ago (1 children)

It would start with acknowledging a problematic culture, and give details of initial resignations or sackings to help excise it.

[–] Anonymousllama@lemmy.world 10 points 2 years ago

Maybe after an actual investigation into these allegations. Taking things at face value and grabbing pitchforks has never worked

[–] Vinnyboiler@feddit.uk 2 points 2 years ago

They recently got a new CEO a month ago because Linus the owner realized he was unfit for that purpose. It should have been dealt with years ago but I wonder if some benefit of the doubt can be given here seeing as the company was in a state of transition and probably would of cleaned up the work culture in private.

Or not because Linus still owns the company and the buck stops at the absolute top. He put his friend in high positions so it would cause a uncomfortable position when someone who wasn't his friend lower down the ladder were to speak out. He has also consistently showed toxic masculinity in the way he acts and has spread it within the fabric in the company,

I have no strong opinion one way or another, but please tell me if I'm being unfair here on either side here. I think the company can still clean itself up and has shown actions before it was publicly known to address it, and I also think the company has misogyny in it's corporate structure and DNA which will constantly be problematic.