
Sam Altman and Y Combinator Bullying Accusations - DigitalSea
https://pando.com/2017/07/03/sam-alt-man/
======
mindcrime
So some 3rd rate blog got banned from attending YC demo days and now they want
to try and weave this into the currently-hot narrative regarding harassment
against women? This strikes me as just a lame attempt at news-jacking.

~~~
everdayimhustln
This happens all the time. Twitter-dramatic people rachet up their Karpman
Drama Triangle histrionics against celebrities to try to get something juicy
to up their social media currency. Sama deals with this every day.

------
rl3
> _Unfortunately, whilst all this was playing out, at least one Valley bro
> apparently decided that a little bit too much progress was being made. That
> at least one woman too many was speaking out._

So the article opens with the implication that Altman is just another 'bro'
complicit in sexually harassing women.

It then hammers on the Bilderberg part like it was somehow relevant.

Furthermore it proceeds to make a tortured comparison between Altman and
Trump, even going so far as to call him "some kind of Alt Right Roger Rabbit".
Presumably this is because their readership is so sophisticated as to
otherwise not understand such alleged impropriety unless framed in context of
Trump.

Never mind the fact that Altman is openly gay and harbors a fervent dislike of
Trump. But hey—when your job involves passing off third-rate trash as
journalism, then I suppose lying by omission to suit an agenda is simply par
for the course.

> _Which brings me to the moral of the story, where my outrage at seeing Sarah
> and Pando smeared by a unremitting scumbag like Sam Altman butts against my
> own guilt at being part of the social group – well-off white dudes in
> Silicon Valley – who are almost exclusively responsible for all of the shit
> we’ve witnessed /read about these past few days._

Ah yes, the moral of the story. This roughly translates as: _" My boss is in a
spat with this guy, and I like my paycheck, so I'm going to call him nasty
names and state that I feel guilty about being born with the same skin color
as him. Then, I'm going to blame other people with the same skin color as me
for the world's ills so I can feel better about myself."_

~~~
s73ver
“Never mind the fact that Altman is openly gay and harbors a fervent dislike
of Trump. But hey—when your job involves passing off third-rate trash as
journalism, then I suppose lying by omission to suit an agenda is simply par
for the course.”

Sure, but he did the same thing Trump has been doing for the past year. That’s
what the comparison is.

~~~
rl3
More like Pando is saying he did. For all we know there's more nuance
somewhere that they're omitting. It's easy to cherry-pick the most flattering
aspects of a Twitter feud and present it as a complete accounting of events.

Regardless, I still fail to see why they felt the need to make the comparison.
It just struck me as a cheap way to vilify him with their readers.

If Altman did what they said he did, then of course that's bad. However, I
can't help but notice he isn't the one penning hate-filled screeds here.

~~~
s73ver
All the tweets are out there to read. And that whole, “I’ve got an
investigation going, but I’m not going to actually say what it revealed” thing
is DIRECTLY out of Trump’s playbook. Like, that’s exactly what he did with
Comey.

And yeah, if he’s being a douche, and worse yet a Trumpian douche, I see no
reason not to call him out on it.

Also, he penned hate-filled screeds during that Twitter exchange.

------
projectileboy
It's hardly worth even commenting on this, except to say that it's dishonest
to conflate how the tech industry treats women with how YC treats journalists
who write bad stuff about them. Every organization does its best to control
how people perceive it, for better or for worse. There are real problems for
women in tech; Pando getting on YC's bad side is hardly one of them.

~~~
falsedan
The article makes the point that the founder of the site was a woman and tries
to show the parallel between systemic harassment of women in VC-backed
companies, and the isolated harassment of Sarah's site by Sam.

------
wheelerwj
everyone in tech knows what pando is. but this needs to be unflagged so that
stories of conspiracies and hiding the truth won't pop up. put it back and let
it die on its own.

~~~
frik
If only half of the story is true, it's still mind blowing what's going on.
Very unfortunately that PG isn't involved anymore.

That Sam has doubts about Adam Penenberg integrity speaks volumes for itself -
Stephen Glass fraud investigator fame - there is even a movie about the case.
No wonder the HN got flagged, uneasy story, it's the user.

~~~
dang
> _No wonder the HN got flagged, uneasy story, it 's the user._

I don't understand this sentence, but no one at YC or HN has touched the
submission. "[flagged]" means lots of users flagged it.

~~~
uvatbc
Suggestion:

/s/flagged/flagged by users/g

------
mej10
Whats up with the name calling and body shaming?

------
lettergram
Honestly, this reads doesn't read like a piece of "journalism"... It's closer
to a Facebook rant.

Clearly, Pando staff don't like Sam Altman, and I think this whole article is
pretty unprofessional.

> How is this the culture that we built? How did we end up creating an
> industry in which lying pipsqueaks like Sam Altman are heralded as “thought
> leaders” and “visionaries”?

I don't know if Sam Altman is a visionary, or thought leader. I do know that
in this case, he kept it way more professional, and the evidence Pando (or Sam
for that matter) bring to the table adds nothing to the conversation.

> What the Sam Altmans care about is that three years ago a website run by a
> woman wrote a mean thing about one of their portfolio companies. In the
> Sams’ world, there must be consequences for that kind of insubordination.
> She must be brought to heel.

To be blunt, none of this on Sam's part seems sexist (at least I don't see
it). Perhaps I missed something, but this seems to be using the "women in tech
have wronged" craze to rationalize some way the Pando staff feel wronged. I
grant you, many women (and probably a whole lot of others, minorities, non-
citizens, etc.) have been wronged, but this... this just detracts from the
discussion. Pando, the New York Times, or anyone can't just attack people for
being in the positions they are in. I can't blame Altman for being in his
position, he's there, all we can do at this point is try to work together to
improve the situation. To do that, petty stuff like this needs to stop.

Occasionally, I'm sure we will need to remove people causing problems, like a
CEO who enables sexual harassment, or a board member who says inappropriate
things. Hopefully, this wont happen too often, as I refuse to believe the vast
majority aren't decent human beings.

That being said, in this case, it seems like Pando is the problem -_-

~~~
perseusprime11
Not to take this on a tangent but wait till female interns at VC firms decide
to speak up. They put up with abnormal requests for attending parties at
abnormal hours.

~~~
lettergram
To be fair, I too am invited to parties at abnormal hours, or out to bars (and
I don't drink), or to the water parks, etc.

I think it's important we keep things in perspective and review every case as
a unique occurrence (or every person at least). There's a danger in
generalizing.

There is obvious sexism (perhaps a ton of it), but I also think it's not
really helpful to just assume certain requests are sexist. Especially, in the
example you just gave, where female interns "abnormal requests for attending
parties at abnormal hours". I'm sure it happens all the time, there may even
be a small sexual component (just like every other industry), however it may
be just as sexist not to invite them...

Unless it impacts their career, or in some disenfranchises them, I really
don't see it as an issue. I can tell you that I turn down literally every
event outside of work that isn't 9am - 5pm. It may impact my career (although
I don' think so), I think people just feel pressured about it.

I can't tell you how pressured I felt turning down our teams offsite to a ski
resort. I turned it down because it wasn't in my job description, but also
because of the following:

(a) I like to spend time with my family

(b) I don't like skiing

(c) All the women had their own rooms, while the guys had to share

(d) I have a fulfilling life outside of work

The reason I bring that up, is a lot of people may look at that situation as
sexist. It actually did disenfranchise me to not go. Literally, I was told
"it's required, you have to go", I still said no.

Personally, I view it as a difference in lifestyles and expectations. I'm not
offended that they made me feel uncomfortable with the offer (idk if I should,
maybe...), I however am upset that I lost something out of it.

I think that's what we need to fix, fix the expectation that work leaves the
office. It's fairly easy to not make people feel uncomfortable if the
expectation that 9am - 5pm it's a "safe space", anything that happens there
you put your work hat on and work appropriately. Then when the shift ends,
your free to put your fun hat on. Don't mix the two, and you'll have a hell of
a lot less problems.

Even with your example, that wouldn't occur.

~~~
URSpider94
I feel for you, I do. I feel the same way about extracurricular events.

But, I think what you're missing is that gender discrimination isn't black and
white. It's a matter of percentages. Let's say bagging out on weekend ski
trips impacts 30% of men, and 42% of women, because women bear more
responsibility for child care tasks, or because they are wary of spending a
beer-fueled weekend snowed in with their male co-workers. Now multiply that by
a dozen other independent circumstances where women are disadvantaged, even by
a percent or two, and you quickly end up with an immense headwind.

Again, that's not to say that you aren't impacted too. But in all likelihood,
you come out ahead or even on some of the other dozen issues.

~~~
Grustaf
If you suffer because of life choices like spending time with your children or
not liking binge beer drinking, that may be unfortunate but is not "sexism".
Even if it happens that women tend to make different choices.

It's like if you have a policy of only hiring people with CS degrees. That's
not sexist, just because most CS graduates are men.

You can't hold the company responsible for the fact that women on average
choose to spend more time with their family and are less inclined to stuy
certain subjects. Unless you discriminate against them BECAUSE they are women,
it's not sexism.

~~~
URSpider94
Yes and no. Requiring a computer science degree is a fairly reasonable
restriction to place on hiring, since it (at least on its face) correlates
strongly with qualification for the job. However, requiring all your employees
to go on a bro's ski weekend trip, or serving your free dinner at 8 PM every
day when none of the women with families can stay for dinner, may have a
disparate impact on employees without any correlation to their work
performance.

To turn up the contrast and make a semi-absurd argument, one could say, "We
don't discriminate on the basis of religion, but we ask all applicants to
recite the Lord's Prayer from memory in their interview. Strangely, we never
seem to hire any Hindu or Muslim applicants." OK, that's absurd, but what if
you only recruit at universities that have extremely low female:male
graduation ratios in their CS programs, when there are other programs with
better balance? That's certainly not discriminatory on its face, but it has
the same result as if you had discriminated overtly.

Sexism may not be the right word (and I didn't use that word), but I do think
it's important to look at the results of your policies and environment in
totality to determine if you are treating women equitably. This is certainly
the standard that the courts use for evaluating things like voting regulations
-- look at the recent rulings on North Carolina's voting laws: actions like
curtailing the number of weekend voting days that do not mention race at all
are clearly crafted to reduce participation by black voters.

~~~
Grustaf
It might not make business sense but surely that should be up to the owners of
the company. If they really like ski trips why not?

Is your suggestion to ban decisions that have disparate impact in terms of
race or gender?

------
friedman23
This article is literally nothing except pando whining about being banned from
ycombinator events.

~~~
xenadu02
There is certainly hyperbole in the article but there is also a good point.

Why is Sam dropping smears? If he really thought there might be something
worth "investigating" he would keep quiet and investigate. It's a total dick
power move (and transparent bullshit) designed to undercut someone you don't
like by spreading innuendo and veiled accusations without actually making the
accusation.

The adult thing to do is say "oops, sorry. donation to charity made" and move
on with your life. That's a good deed no matter how you slice it plus good PR
in general. There is no win to be had here because Sam is punching down.

I'm honestly disappointed. The faux-apology just makes it worse. Much respect
to you Sam, but this is childish behavior. We know it, you know it.

(I say this knowing I've doubled-down and done stuff like this in the past and
regretted it every time)

~~~
nojvek
Sama could have ended the drama nice and quiet but he decides to play along.

Pando editors are definitely unprofessional here. If they care about their
integrity, I think they should apologize for raging a bit too much.

------
madmax108
>>> "We didn’t tolerate it from the most valuable private company in Silicon
Valley history and we sure as aren’t going to take it from the substitute
teacher of Paul Graham’s bro creche."

Touche. I disagree, but touche nonetheless!

------
nojvek
I follow Pando and this feels like an awfully written piece looking to just
pin a blame.

I hope by just throwing sexual harassment claims Without serious facts they
don't ruin trust and credibility.

------
Grustaf
There is no indication, even if you believe this post, that Altman did
anything because of "sexism". At most he's generally vengeful. In fact the
only sexism (and racism) in this story comes from Pando.

------
michaelrhansen
Not sure this has anything to do with gender or race. Sounds like a
disagreement on facts of a story. Seems like stirring controversy to takeover
an important conversation and get clicks. Kind of like Fox News or CNN.

------
babesh
I don’t think it was sexist. It’s just standard power based behavior. Isn’t
specific to tech. Have seen that sort of behavior from people in power of all
genders and ethnicities in the Valley for as long as I’ve been in the
industry.

Examples: \- It doesn’t matter what’s in the contract. I have a lot more money
than you and can sue you to oblivion. \- Tell me what to say to his boss when
the boss asks me a question. \- If you have two people and one has more
seniority and the other is better, who do you give the better assignment to?
The one with seniority. That’s why I’m leaving.

~~~
fapjacks
I completely agree, but (sort of incidentally) I do wish that there was some
recognition that the "tech industry" is not one specific group of people. Even
at the most basic level, there are the hackers, and then there are the MBAs
that flocked in when the money started flowing. Two completely disparate
subcultures that are lumped in together under one banner, and not only lumped
together that way by outsiders, but by "the tech industry" itself.

------
iamshs
Not much spice in this gravy. Could not understand the story despite reading
it twice. Pando is just trying to make hay while the sun shines, or as we say
in India, "Behti ganga mein hath dhona".

------
dandare
> ..."white dudes"... ..."white bros"...

Why the fck could we not leave the race out of it? Nobody would dare to speak
about race unless they are white - in which case it is used as a slur?

~~~
nojvek
I thought the same. What it sama was an African female. Would you use the same
words?

That's fucked up.

------
ithought
They're conflating two different things. Criticism is fine and should be
encouraged. Hysterical ranty responses with false claims is an enormous
problem.

This phenomenon that we can't criticize actions without being falsely accused
of being an "x hater" is dangerous. What Pando has done is dishonest.

------
relics443
Funny how perception works. I perceive Sam Altman to be a borderline far
leftist. I guess it makes sense that those to the far left of him would see
things differently.

~~~
vertex-four
Sam Altman is as liberal as liberals get. Not a leftist by any means.

------
Judgmentality
While I agree this article is pretty bad, why is it disappearing from the
front page so fast? It's being upvoted pretty quickly. @dang is adamant that
they don't punish articles that are negative towards Y Combinator, and I don't
see it as flagged yet, so I'm curious.

~~~
SomeStupidPoint
I see it as flagged, at least currently.

~~~
Judgmentality
It is now. The difference a minute makes :)

------
scarya
Can someone explain to me why this was flagged?

~~~
wheelerwj
because its a boring political story that has no technical relevance.

~~~
xenadu02
There's also optics. Flagging the story just feeds the narrative that YC is
"hiding" something regardless of the truth.

When you see a PR train coming down the tracks... get out of the way. You can
stand there and yell at it all you like but it won't matter. When you get to a
certain point in life (high office, large influence, and/or lots of money)
there is nowhere to punch but down. That means you have to stop throwing
punches or you have to accept the hate. Those are your two options. On the
plus side you're still really rich and/or powerful so it isn't exactly a bad
deal.

~~~
dang
Agreed in general, and we make a careful point of moderating HN less, not
more, when an article is critical of YC or YC startups, although 'less'
doesn't mean 'zero' (one learns about loopholes the hard way when running a
web forum). But it's a moot point in this case; HN users have flagged the
story overwhelmingly and the comments make it clear why. Since the community
response is so clear, I think it's probably sufficient for us to simply
explain that moderators haven't intervened in any way.

------
thebiglebrewski
[https://youtu.be/E5ONTXHS2mM?t=38s](https://youtu.be/E5ONTXHS2mM?t=38s) pando
pando pando pando pando

