
This is Hackathon Harassment - CodeLikeAGirl
https://code.likeagirl.io/this-is-hackathon-harassment-6d4fdfd8cbdf
======
aaron-lebo
I understand I'm the wrong gender to be saying this, but I don't see
harassment there. Maybe there was harassment (dozens of emails over a week
could be it, but she never says what the emails say or even how much it is).
It's just "harassment". I'm willing to believe that the guy was being
threatening and harassing, but I also read into that evidence a guy who is
socially inept and frustrating to work with, but not sure on the harassment
part.

A further example, when she texted one of the mentors, she got back:

 _I am not trying to be too invasive in the reasons, but would like to know
the reasons of the early split._

To which she states:

 _This mentor said he wasn’t trying to be invasive, but he was._

Then she says that how they really should have responded was (edit: this is
another actual response):

 _Thanks for letting me know, [I’m] sure you had good reasons and I’m glad to
hear that you’ll continue on with [Project]._

OK, I get why you'd prefer the second response, but considering what happened,
it's not rude for them to ask what's up, and they even padded that question so
as to not be demanding. It's possible that's an unusual situation for them. I
kind of get the feeling that neither person is really fun to work with, but
that's based on what's in this blog post.

I don't mean to be a jerk or victim blame or anything like that.

~~~
amaranthine
OP here!

If Mark was an employee who was fired and refused to leave the premises, he'd
be escorted off by security. If he promised to show up a few weeks later to
talk to the board of directors or investors, they'd similarly bring in
security.

That's what happened here (or what he threatened to do, anyway.) After a
really bad weekend, he was "fired". Then, over a series of emails with
escalating demands he eventually threatened to show up at the project booth
falsely representing himself on the project. Yet, he was offered exactly what
he'd have gotten if he stayed on the project.

As for the rest, it's probably harder to see this if you've never had to do it
before, but it's really exhausting being asked to repeatedly justify your
actions in a situation like this.

When you find that one golden person who says, "I trust your judgment", it's
honestly shocking. It feels good to have your judgment trusted when you go to
someone saying, "Hey, I was in a bad situation and had to make a difficult
decision" and they say, "That sounds tough, but I bet you made the right
choice," rather than, "Tell me why you did that?"

~~~
openmosix
The analogy with a company is misleading. Is Mark a cofounder or an employee
of this company?

* If a cofounder, he's probably entitled to shares. As a cofounder, talking to the board or investors would fit the character (he /was/ a cofounder)

* If an employee, as employee was getting paid or equity. Upon termination, he would receive severance. I think the discussion about how many tickets, what percentage of the booth, etc isn't very different from a company firing an employee and discussing how much severance. For a company with no money, how to split the assets.

In general, as investor/board member, I would be shocked to know that an
employee - who hasn't signed an IP license agreement - is walking away,
without signing an IP license agreement, making the entire IP asset of the
company a potential legal liability. As board member, I'd have advised the CEO
to QUICKLY settle this IP dispute, to give in on everything requested (booth,
tickets, etc) - BUT - to receive a signed paper claiming full ownership of the
project. Booth and tickets can easily be replaced. A startup whose IP
ownership is unclear will be a dealbreaker for any investments during ANY due
diligence process.

~~~
leereeves
Employees are paid, even if the idea fails.

Perhaps the tickets could be considered Mark's pay, but how much are the
members of other projects who don't win paid?

If nothing, as seems likely, they (and Mark) aren't employees.

------
program_whiz
Sorry but this doesn't seem like harassment to me. Read his email without
projecting any tone, it sounds totally reasonable. Your mentor also wasn't
being sexist, he was suggesting you not start a startup by discarding the most
passionate team member who helped write the prize-winning software.

I'm not seeing the "you're a woman and I'm threatening you" anywhere. "By the
way I designed cool t-shirts, you want one?" and "Lets not have any bad vibes
due to this", doesn't sound like "Do what I want or I'll kill you."

Maybe the guy is selfish, and intensely trying to "make it" (sounds like a
young over-eager tech guy), but he's not threatening to attack or
"victimizing" due to sexist views imo.

If someone disagrees, please provide one shred of evidence. As best I can make
out its summarized with the big-text quote midway through:

"He didn’t use all caps. He didn’t swear. He didn’t yell. All he did was
calmly… threaten. Subtly… insinuate. And distance himself from reality, little
by little."

I'm not impressed, the bar has been raised for claims of harassment and
victimization. If you had spent your whole weekend working around the clock on
a project that won the prize on your own code, only to be told your dreams
were now crushed because you "weren't a good fit", you'd probably be begging
to find a way to hold onto the tickets or the project as well, whether your
boss was male or female.

[Edit] And also, the mentors, the coordinators, the others in the posts all
seem to agree that this isn't harassment. This really points to an issue with
hackathons in general. You have people contributing to a "startup", then
getting tickets to an expo, all without any contracts, just some verbal
agreements -- these type of disagreements are bound to happen.

~~~
MagicMouseTrap
This is exactly how I felt too; nowhere in his responses do I see any form or
sexual harassment. Sure, the person is a little intense and doesn't seem to
get the hint, but this isn't at all related to gender. There's absolutely no
reason to pull gender into this at all.

At what point does the line blur between needing special treatment because
you're a different gender and equality?

Edit: after rereading the article I realize my comment might've been a bit
knee-jerky. However, I do feel the author puts emphasis on the gender of the
people referenced in the story. Above all the line "I considered: what would a
male CEO do in this situation?" feels like a forced focus on gender. But I
concede; the article focusses on harassment in general, not sexual, mea culpa.

~~~
alexandercrohde
> At what point does the line blur between needing special treatment because
> you're a different gender and equality?

Well, as I read this piece she's describing potentially abusive behavior, but
not gender related. I read it as a shitstorm of over-intense personalities
with optimistic dreams of being the next big thing creating an awful
environment for eachother. Somebody of either gender could have a bitter ex-
teammate who wants to undercut them.

So I read this as a criticism of the atmosphere of hackathons rather than a
women-in-tech issue.

Now, the philosophical question is whether this distinction means I agree or
disagree with the author.

~~~
CodeLikeAGirl
It isn't claiming to be sexual Harassment, but Harassment in general. This
story would be equally awful it it happened to a man. However, a man wouldn't
have to think about his personal safety as much by attending the event they
won. So the result of the Harassment plays out differently for each gender.

~~~
trgv
> a man wouldn't have to think about his personal safety as much by attending
> the event they won.

Can you elaborate?

~~~
cannonedhamster
A man generally is not at the same disadvantage physically should someone
decide to attack or overpower them. Even if things were uncomfortable they
could reasonably expect to defend themselves.

------
startupdiscuss
There are two ways to read this article:

1\. Be completely skeptical of the author's claims and demand proof.

2\. Give the author the benefit of the doubt.

I submit that when we ordinarily read an article, we do the second. We can't
know what the other person did that was creepy or intense, but we have
(presumably) all been in similar situations. The person snaps, or doesn't
respond, or yells, or takes credit or any number of odious habits.

For whatever reason, some people are inclined to not give this author the
benefit of the doubt and, without being there, want to give this other person
the benefit of the doubt.

To them I would say this: imagine that you have an idea and recruit a
technical person to help you with it. After a weekend, you tell them its not
going to work for whatever reason.

Maybe you just don't like the way they smell, or they go off on goofy
tangents, or you don't like their puns, or they don't laugh at your jokes. I
don't care. Its just one weekend and you don't want to work with them.

You have a right to ask them not to work with you and move on. You didn't say
this was forever. If the person refused to move one, what would you do?

~~~
lostmsu
Did she pay though?

~~~
startupdiscuss
The agreement was that the work was voluntary.

If you volunteer to fix my yard, and after a weekend, I tell you thanks but
please leave, am I suddenly expected to pay for it?

~~~
LyndsySimon
> The agreement was that the work was voluntary.

I'm just not seeing that in the article.

~~~
jasonlotito
It's made very clear in the article. That's the point of SW. It is voluntary.
It's understood that you are sharing everything. Both ways.

~~~
LyndsySimon
> It's understood that you are sharing everything. Both ways.

This was my preconception, based on the hackathons I've attended.

That also doesn't fit well with the article - it seems the author was
expecting it to be their company.

In the absence of a prior discussion or agreement, I would expect it to be an
equal partnership.

~~~
jasonlotito
No, not at all. There is no equal partnership. They are under no obligation to
bring you on board. You are free to go your own way, and so are they. God, if
there was an implied equal partnership, that would be bad.

------
ohyoutravel
Really not trying to be a stick in the mud, and Mark does give me a little
pause. However, there were only two people on this team, right? Which leads me
to the conclusion that you were the PM (as you specifically say you're the
project leader) and Mark was the engineer? I don't go to too many hackathons,
but if it's you two only, that makes me think 50/50 split. I understand if
you're parting ways, sure, but this seems like a legitimate complaint from a
50/50 split team:

"While I understand the original idea was yours, I need you to understand that
the prize we won together. […] That exhibition booth […] is as much mine as it
is yours."

And of course either of you can choose to leave the team unilaterally, but on
a 50/50 team, it seems odd that one person can "fire" the other person and
take all the benefits (minus one ticket) that the team won together. If we
formed a 50/50 team, and a VC gave us a bunch of funding, and I told you I was
firing you and giving you some of the VC money, you would be pretty miffed.

If there's a booth to demonstrate things, then your statement here seems odd:

"The tickets being offered were exactly what he would have gotten as a team
member.."

because there's more to the benefits of winning than a ticket to a conference
or whatever. Additionally, you paint his email as harassment, but I really
don't see it:

[https://cdn-images-1.medium.com/max/2000/1*DQAH9nLoO8yC4rwtK...](https://cdn-
images-1.medium.com/max/2000/1*DQAH9nLoO8yC4rwtK61hgQ.png)

I won't continue from there as hopefully you get the idea. And I'm not blaming
you, but it really does not seem like harassment, despite the narrative you're
painting. It makes me think you have some angle here, but someone shouldn't be
"fired" and told to leave a project that they had a 50/50 stake in because you
thought they were a little gruff.

~~~
amaranthine
Hi, I'm the OP!

There were no engineers on this team. I have a CS background but decided that
because the project would require significant AI work, the best use of time
during the weekend would be user research and wireframing to validate the
proof-of-concept. I did program management, UX design, and was "CEO"; Mark did
graphic design.

I don't want to get too into the weeds on what the exact breakdown of work
was, but it wasn't an equal 50/50.

What I know is this:

\- Techstars, the overall organization, doesn't provide guidance re: whether
teams are hierarchical or non-hierarchical, or what should happen when and if
teams split (which happens to 75% of them)

\- Mentors had mixed guidance; however, multiple said that because I pitched
the idea, did over half of the work, and was the "project leader" I was
effectively "CEO"

\- A lawyer I consulted with also said that without any partnership agreements
promising a 50/50 split, "ownership" was mine as idea originator, project
leader, etc.

But putting all that aside, I think the point most often overlooked is that if
this was a company, if Mark was fired and then refused to leave, he'd be
escorted away by security. If he threatened to show up later representing
himself as an employee and talking to investors, that would be considered a
credible threat and they'd take that seriously.

I didn't know if him busting into the project booth was the worst he'd try. I
was considering hiring security and cancelled my trip at significant personal
expense.

~~~
openmosix
I'm not sure the (frequent) comparison you are making to a company. In a real
company, he would have received a salary for his work and equity. On the
"firing" day, he would have received "severance". So if you are comparing it
with a company and a termination, every termination involves some level of
"severance" \- unless you are firing him for cause (I'm keeping the company-
firing analogy). I doubt this would be a termination for cause (I don't like
you/it's not a good fit) is not a termination for cause.

I think the problem you have experienced is that you started a project with
someone else in a team of 2. You managed him as an "employee" but he felt
(right or wrong) to be a cofounder. It seems you haven't discusses this prior
of the project, so somehow you got stuck with a co-founder (and everything
else that followed is just that).

I've been in similar situations, where cofounders have to split. It's never
easy and there's always intensity involved. I'd not call them harassment
though. Following again your company analogy, when you fire an employee, there
is (often) drama - especially if you try to fire an employee without severance
(well, in that case often there are legal problems).

Anyway, if you point out he was a volunteer at a startup weekend, do not
mention the company analogy. In the company analogy - regardless if he was a
cofounder or an employee - he would not walk away empty handed.

~~~
clay_to_n
>every termination involves some level of "severance" Where does this
statement come from? I don't think that's true in the U.S., not for full-time
employees and especially not for independent contractors. Especially not for
an unpaid position like an intern (whether legal "for school credit" or
illegal), which is what this most resembles.

If she was the CEO / owner of the hypothetical company (this seems to be the
point that people disagree on - was she owner or co-founder?), she absolutely
has the right to fire an unpaid "employee" whose contributions were two days
of work with no expectation of severance.

------
throwaway00088
I don't see any harassment in anything he wrote. Here's what I see: Web Summit
is next week, and Mark has made his case to the hackathon organizers that he
should get the tickets and booth since he was actually on the team, and Kim
doesn't want them. Kim, apparently out of spite, would prefer that the tickets
go to some unrelated person she chooses.

Now she's taking this dispute public. She hasn't named Mark yet, but people
can deduce it. Does Mark want to wind up like any of the dozens of alleged
perpetrators of sexual harassment and sexual assault that have been called out
of the past two weeks? If not, he should let this thing drop and let her get
her way. Kim is the real bully here.

------
coreyp_1
If they did not make an IP agreement, then don't they each own the code that
they wrote? In effect, isn't she "stealing" the work and presenting it as her
own?

I see his objections to her IP and substantive theft (the code and IP, the
booth presence and control over 1/2 of a ticket) as justified. His reaction
may not be 100% blameless, either, but she is the original offender here.

The worst part is that she tries to use a "harassment" accusation to justify
her theft.

~~~
amaranthine
Hi there - no code was written during the weekend. After consulting with a
lawyer, we concluded the only "IP" was the original idea, which I pitched.

The weekend was used exclusively for user research, concept validation, and
some wireframing.

(My partner's work - a mock website and logo - couldn't be used after the
weekend.)

Techstars has its own guidance regarding IP, but it's rather hand-wavey. I was
surprised by this when I later found out that only 25% of teams continue
working together.

> "As with any startup, the team decides. Techstars Startup Weekend doesn’t
> support or take part in the signing of any legal documents at the events
> themselves, and while Mentors with legal backgrounds are often present and
> able to give general advice, they are not permitted to give specific legal
> counsel. While it doesn’t hurt to be clear about your individual
> expectations from the start, we’ve found that teams who don’t spend time
> addressing this issue until it actually matters (i.e., there is a tangible
> product to have ownership of) are much more productive and successful than
> those who do."

[https://startupweekend.org/attendees/faq](https://startupweekend.org/attendees/faq)

~~~
coreyp_1
I'm not buying it. IP is not limited to code.

"the team decides". That is not what happened. You decided.

The booth presence and the tickets are as much his as they are yours. If you
decide to take them (and use them, give them away, or anything else) you are
taking part of something that he has a right to.

Again, I do not justify his response (as he is not here for me to address),
but what should he have done in light of someone denying him access to
something that is rightfully his?

Just because you did not do your due diligence (because you didn't know that
you should, or were inexperienced in hackathons, or whatever...) and you
turned out to not like working with the other person, does not negate the work
or award that the team accomplished together. Regret does not change anything.

------
startupdiscuss
Not the most disturbing, but the strangest aspect, is how the truth of the
matter kept getting lost and people who had no idea about what had happened
held strong opinions.

Makes me wonder how often this happens in other news items.

I do want to know what happened with the tickets and the booth, though.

~~~
uoaei
Look around this comment thread and you will see the exact same thing.

~~~
jaxmurr
> Not the most disturbing, but the strangest aspect, is how the truth of the
> matter kept getting lost and people who had no idea about what had happened
> held strong opinions.

The author quite thoroughly documented the entire ordeal (with screenshots and
everything).

I'm struggling to understand how this comment thread is an example of "the
truth of the matter getting lost," when we have all the "evidence" of the
"harassment," and are merely pointing out what we see?

~~~
spraak
Because most of the people commenting here seem to have not actually read the
article. E.g. so many comments mention /sexual/ harassment, but the article
was mostly focused on just harassment in general, and didn't claim that Mark's
actions were explicitly sexual.

------
Osseric
“If I go, how dangerous is he?”

Yeah, because someone sending you emails is surely physically dangerous.
Spooky men.

~~~
CodeLikeAGirl
Based on our historic experience with men, if they treat us like that over
email, it is probable they will treat us like that in person. His behaviour
made her feel unsafe. Why would you knowing put yourself into an unsafe
situation.

~~~
pfarnsworth
Treat you like what? Where was the threat in the email? Did he call OP a
"bitch", "slut", etc? Did he belittle her? He asked her for his share of the
prize and said that if she didn't then he would pursue it unilaterally.

Since when did that mean he was going to physically harm her? Sorry, I believe
sexual harassment occurs in the tech industry and should be stamped out, but
this is not a case of it.

~~~
orwin
Tis is NOT a case of sexual harassment. He might be unknowingly threatening
(best case scenario, the one i believe), or downright manipulative, either way
she do not want to work with him. He joined her on the project and she offered
to give him 2 of the 3 tickets then he started his passive-agressive emails. I
got those from people i worked with too, every time i just left the project
(mainly because it was never mine). This type of passive-agressive behaviour
exist very much in tech, mainly because this behaviour is related with self-
entitlment and goes well with smug personnalities.

------
rmetzler
I have a story to tell and I was kind of the Mark in your story. Except my
brother was on the other end of the story and he got it all wrong which turned
in both of us not talking with each other for more than a year. It wasn't a
good time in my life and it's really hard to write about it.

It also wasn't the first time, I was part of something, putting much work into
the project and got fired from it. It's not nice to get fired after you
volunteered to help someone with their project. Selfish people seem to think
the success is their own and they own the project, because they had the idea,
not recognizing that success is a team effort.

Ok, my story: my brother is a lawyer, I'm a software developer. After
finishing his degree, he decided to start his own law firm and I helped him to
create his website including SEO, etc. He became very successful more or less
over night. Before we had lived together in an apartment and there were weeks
when we didn't eat much except rice and fishsauce, now he had the money to buy
Macs and Porsches.

The website was build with WordPress and several plugins, so I thought my job
was it to update it as often as possible in order to not allow hackers to
access his clients data or bring the site down. I didn't have any formal
contract with my brother. In fact, he didn't really understood what I did -
the site was finished as he saw it, why would he need an admin? He gave me
gifts, often much bigger ones than I expected, but I didn't have much income.
What I wanted was an income I could count on, even when it was a small one.

I made the mistake and told him, I needed a contract to provide the work so
nothing would happen to the site. He understood that all wrong and thought I
was threatening him and the website. He went into panic mode instantly. In his
panic he even changed passwords, including the MySQL password, but didn't know
that he needed to change it in the WordPress config too. This brought his
website down.

Of course I helped him to recover the website, but we were mad about each
other for month and didn't talk. I had a rough time, I was depressive and
broke. I couldn't pay my health insurance and the fucking health insurance
company was able to suspend my banking account. Not once, but thrice.

The whole fight wasn't worth it.

I know, this story doesn't has much to do with what has happend to OP, except
one thing: Please try to talk to each other and understand the reasons why
someone does something.

------
jacknews
I can't see what this has to do with 'harassment' especially as it's being
gently couched to sound like sexual harassment ("powerless to stop him from
invading my booth at the conference.", etc).

I think the idea of these events is that everyone is volunteering their
talent, and that includes the "project leader" and "their" idea.

We hear enough on here about how ideas in themselves are all but worthless, so
the result of the hackathon is really jointly owned by those participating,
and I think the "volunteer guy" (and it seems that in her mind she could have
just "hired" another objectified commodity-person, right?) has every right to
be less than impressed at being summarily dismissed from a project he seems to
have helped create.

------
optimuspaul
The responses here make me a little sick. Why are you all brushing off her
experiences? Stop belittling this person.

~~~
jaxmurr
Did you read the article? It uses the word "harassment" quite liberally, and
belittles _actual_ victims of harassment.

~~~
startupdiscuss
Harassment doesn't necessarily mean _sexual_ harassment.

~~~
ohyoutravel
No one thinks that it does, in fact "sexual harassment" hadn't even crossed my
mind. But based purely on what the author wrote (which seems comprehensive,
complete with emails), I don't see harassment.

~~~
jasonlotito
Yes, people do. Here is one example.

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15586109](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15586109)

