←back to thread

492 points storf45 | 8 comments | | HN request time: 0.001s | source | bottom
Show context
walrushunter ◴[] No.42154141[source]
I'm an engineering manager at a Fortune 500 company. The dumbest engineer on our team left for Netflix. He got a pay raise too.

Our engineers are fucking morons. And this guy was the dumbest of the bunch. If you think Netflix hires top tier talent, you don't know Netflix.

replies(30): >>42154160 #>>42154170 #>>42154176 #>>42154207 #>>42154212 #>>42154215 #>>42154217 #>>42154219 #>>42154225 #>>42154276 #>>42154278 #>>42154295 #>>42154314 #>>42154327 #>>42154373 #>>42154379 #>>42154399 #>>42154413 #>>42154440 #>>42154466 #>>42154547 #>>42154591 #>>42154596 #>>42154612 #>>42154786 #>>42154904 #>>42154925 #>>42155154 #>>42156451 #>>42157645 #
AdieuToLogic ◴[] No.42154379[source]
> I'm an engineering manager at a Fortune 500 company. The dumbest engineer on our team left for Netflix. He got a pay raise too.

Apparently he was smart enough to get away from the Fortune 500 company he worked at, reporting to yourself, and "got a pay raise too."

> Our engineers are fucking morons. And this guy was the dumbest of the bunch.

See above.

> If you think Netflix hires top tier talent, you don't know Netflix.

Maybe you don't know the talent within your own organization. Which is entirely understandable given your proclamation:

  Our engineers are fucking morons.
Then again, maybe this person who left your organization is accurately described as such, which really says more about the Fortune 500 company employing him and presumably continues to employ yourself.

IOW, either the guy left to get out from under an EM who says he is a "fucking moron" or he actually is a "fucking moron" and you failed as a manager to elevate his skills/performance to a satisfactory level.

replies(4): >>42154864 #>>42154883 #>>42155008 #>>42155124 #
1. briansm ◴[] No.42154883[source]
White-Knighting for 'fucking morons' is not a good look though. You'll end up in a world where packets of peanuts have a label on saying 'may contain nuts'.
replies(3): >>42154939 #>>42154951 #>>42156394 #
2. rjh29 ◴[] No.42154939[source]
Which would be doubly silly as peanuts aren't actually nuts.
replies(2): >>42155018 #>>42155023 #
3. briansm ◴[] No.42154951[source]
... or a world where grown adults pay millions of dollars to watch grown adults fighting like school children.

In fact, what am I even doing in this thread? - close-tab.

replies(1): >>42162024 #
4. jhugo ◴[] No.42155018[source]
… which is why the label makes sense. They may have been contaminated with nuts during production.
5. bryanrasmussen ◴[] No.42155023[source]
I think acting as if peanuts are actually nuts for purposes of communication is much more defensible than acting as if tomatoes are vegetables, in short you are dying on a hill that was paved over long ago.
replies(1): >>42156136 #
6. rjh29 ◴[] No.42156136{3}[source]
I agree most people will conflate them, but someone who's allergic to peanuts but not tree nuts (or vice versa), i.e. the people the labels are intended for, are going to care about the difference.
7. horns4lyfe ◴[] No.42156394[source]
And you think white knighting for managers who call their directs all “fucking morons” is a good look?
8. TRiG_Ireland ◴[] No.42162024[source]
That's the biggest confusion to me. Why on earth was this such a big deal? But perhaps Hacker News isn't the best place for that conversation.