
A Message from KPCB Partner, John Doerr - dwynings
http://www.kpcb.com/news/115/text
======
hemancuso
The strategic calculus of filing a lawsuit like this scares me. You're ALREADY
partner at one of the very best firms. BEST case scenario you make a huge
amount of money in an out of court settlement and then hopefully somebody else
hires you. Maybe you start you own firm.

I have to imagine that things were really bad for Ms Pao. Or at the very
least, she must certainly felt them to be.

Perhaps she's interested in retribution via soaking them for a ton of cash,
but I can't help but doubt that. It's hard to imagine she lands in a better
place, career-wise.

A truly difficult situation for her and KPCB.

~~~
jorgeortiz85
I'm not familiar with the situation or any of the parties involved, but...
maybe she was wronged and wants to stand up for herself and for future
employees of the firm, because no one should suffer from discrimination in the
workplace?

Not everything in life can be reduced to a financial cost/benefit analysis.
Sometimes you have to do the right thing.

~~~
hemancuso
That's exactly how I feel. I mostly meant to point out how difficult (and
costly) doing the right thing must be. Also, I don't mean to suggest most of
the costs or benefits are financial. I believe they are mostly personal and
career.

------
slantyyz
I don't know what happened either way, but a choice quote:

> In the end, facts – not unfounded claims – will determine the outcome of the
> suit filed against us.

The devil's advocate could just as easily rephrase it this way:

"In the end, facts – not the findings of an "independent" investigator we
hired – will determine the outcome of the suit filed against us."

I know it's a tough PR crisis to handle, but somehow I think an Apple-styled
cone of silence about the issue might have been a better approach.

~~~
ghshephard
"facts – not unfounded claims will determine the outcome of the suit filed
against us."

Something to keep in mind, that ultimately, it's the evidence and the quality
of the legal team that will determine the outcome of the suit. The facts/truth
of the matter come in a distant third.

I often view the results of a court case as an indication of how much evidence
could be discovered by each side, and how effective their attorneys were,
rather than a clearcut indication of guilt/innocence.

I wonder if anyone has ever done any controlled studies, some anti-
rashomonesque like scenario, where the guilt/innocence of each party was
objectively and quantifiably determined, and then run a statistically valid
sample of these cases through the court system, to see how well
guilt/innocence correlates with the court findings.

~~~
slantyyz
IANAL, but civil cases aren't so much about guilt beyond a reasonable doubt as
they are a balance of probabilities. So the result would be based on whether
Ms. Pao's story is more likely to be true than false.

------
staunch
I do give them the benefit of the doubt, everyone deserves that. The reason
I'm _inclined_ to believe the allegations is that they're _relatively_ mild,
which makes them far more believable to mind mind.

I seriously doubt there was real premeditated or conspiratorial sexism on be
half of the top KPCB guys, but I wouldn't be surprised at all that they
unconsciously favored men for promotions/compensation. Even women have trouble
not favoring men in that way, in my experience.

So even if KPCB loses the court case I wouldn't think much less of them.
They're just humans at the mercy of their biases, doing their best to fight
them, and sometimes failing.

~~~
Loic
My wife is working in a big corporation. What you describe is a fundamental
problem at all the levels which is very hard to overcome. The company is doing
regular training for the people hiring just to show them how they effectively
discriminate event without claiming and having the feeling they are not.

This is because _you naturally hire and promote people like you_. This comes
from the evolution of mankind where we trust more people like us and we are
resistant to change. You had a good worker, white and a man, you naturally try
to hire "the same" if you need to replace him even if a black woman could do
the same or even better.

You cannot escape it easily, you need to constantly try hard not to
discriminate.

------
rhizome
He sneaks a bit of sophist elision in here:

 _In the end, facts – not unfounded claims – will determine the outcome of the
suit filed against us. We will vigorously defend our reputation and are
confident we will prevail._

Non-sequitur: reputations are composed of more than facts. Not only that, but
if you gloss right over it, he appears to be placing these sentences next to
each other for two slimy (I say) reasons: that the reader will connect
"prevail" with "the outcome of the suit," a connection the words don't
support, and also that even if they lose the suit, their reputation will be
successfully defended. Kind of a weird point to feel you have to make, and a
bit of a dogwhistle to their partners and clients.

------
icki
[http://techcrunch.com/2012/05/22/kleiner-perkins-sexual-
hara...](http://techcrunch.com/2012/05/22/kleiner-perkins-sexual-harassment-
lawsuit-ellen-pao/)

This is in response to a gender discrimination lawsuit.

~~~
planetguy
A few observations:

1\. Oh, you lawyers. A carefully hidden sentence: "Plaintiff eventually
succumbed to Mr Naszre's insistence on sexual relations on two or three
occasions". That's the only indication in the entire document that this woman
was, in fact, bangin' Mr Naszre. If you ask me, it should be pretty darn
difficult to win a "sexual harassment" lawsuit against somebody if you
willingly and consensually had sex with 'em both before and after the alleged
harassment.

Also, was it two or three? Is she really so unsure of the exact number? It's
not like we're talking "fifteen or sixteen" times you cheated on your fiance
with a married man, Ms Pao.

2\. As for gender discrimination preventing her from moving up: you're a
freaking _partner_. What's the next step up, exactly?

I'm sure things _might_ have been weird after she'd had sex with her coworker,
but geez, you should have thought of that before you opened your legs, Ms Pao.

This is not to deny that Mr Naszre had some culpability here too, they both
share it. But since it's _she_ rather than _he_ who is doing the suing here
it's more relevant to point out her own misconduct.

edit: Removed namecalling.

~~~
sp332
_If you ask me, it should be pretty darn difficult to win a "sexual
harassment" lawsuit against somebody if you willingly and consensually had sex
with 'em both before and after the alleged harassment._

If you were in a relationship before (that included sex), then broke off the
relationship, then were harassed into more sex afterward, that's still a
criminal act of sexual harassment.

~~~
aheilbut
There wasn't any allegation of criminal acts. People might behave boorishly
and be jerks, but that isn't a crime.

~~~
sp332
Right, sorry I forgot this was a civil case. This is definitely enough for a
civil case.

------
leftnode
I'll reserve judgement until the case is concluded, but something I see
repeated with this is that they are a very diverse firm. That's great and
progressive.

It still doesn't mean something like this couldn't happen.

------
atomical
What does one do or not do to get a legitimate bad performance review at a VC
firm?

~~~
earbitscom
I am pulling these out of my 4$$ but all of the normal things you could get a
bad review over would apply. A portfolio company's respected founders
(basically, your client/customer) saying that a partner was difficult to work
with, making poor suggestions, wasting time with questions they could get
answers for elsewhere, or embarrassing them in meetings with important
contacts, etc. Another partner saying that you are difficult to get along
with, argumentative, do not do proper research, miss glaring information that
demonstrates high risk in an investment, and so on.

Basically, doing a shitty job, being difficult to work with, ruining the
firm's reputation, and/or making very bad investment decisions would be good
ways to get a bad review.

------
SeoxyS
> Most importantly, we’re backing them not because they are women, but because
> they are the best at what they do.

This is why I'm 100% behind KPCB here. Doerr gets it. At the end of the day,
what matters to them is who will do the best job, not whether they're men or
women.

~~~
rayiner
The world would be great if all that mattered was who did the best job. The
world is nothing like that, however.

~~~
mathattack
No opinion on guilt or innocence, but one could use the same "they are the
best so not guilty" defense about the "best" in Wall Street too.

------
andyzweb
I am missing some context. what is surrounding all this?

~~~
jdale27
<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4008796>

