
I'm a creep. I'm sorry - duellsy
https://500hats.com/im-a-creep-i-m-sorry-d2c13e996ea0
======
alexandercrohde
A lot of people here seem to not understand the power imbalance point, so I'd
like to explain it.

Imagine you're in these positions: \--Being arrested, and an officer makes a
romantic advance \--On trial, and the judge makes a romantic advance \--In
therapy, and the therapist makes a romantic advance \--At the doctor, and the
doctor makes a romantic advance \--At the bank, and the banker makes a
romantic advance \--In a restaurant, and the waiter makes a romantic advance
\--At work, and the cleaning staff makes a romantic advance \--In class, and
the teacher makes a romantic advance \--Buying a car, and the car dealer makes
a romantic advance

Obviously each of these situations is a little different, and the
appropriateness of flirting in each situation is a little bit different (for
example a therapist will lose the ability to practice for life if they date a
client, e.g. Dr. Phil).

When you consider why some of these are obviously wrong (cop, judge,
therapist, teacher) it's because the individual in question has a
responsibility to make a neutral judgement call that will have a meaningful
impact on your life.

Now I'm not saying I have the answer to this, but I think we need to begin the
discussion by establishing some principles.

~~~
shams93
We need to legalize prostitution so that an investor or manager who has these
fantasies can play them out with professional help. If we viewed prostitutes
as a form of health therapist and gave them professional respect rather than
keeping them in the black market a lot of these guys could work out their
power issues with a trained sex professional instead of creating these
nightmares for innocent women who just want to do a great job or run a
successful startup.

~~~
fatbird
You're assuming these guys see this as a problem. I suspect for most of them,
the power issues are, erotically, the whole point. Why patronize a prostitute
for make believe alpha male abuse of one's position when one has the real
thing every day?

~~~
thehardsphere
Plus, if it really is a power thing, then paying for the prostitute
immediately screws that up. They're paying, so they know it's not as real as
it would be if they didn't.

Maybe if you could pay prostitutes for them as a third party in some way, that
could work.

~~~
petraeus
We need the Uber of prostitution!

------
daenz
Is it just me, or is committing public seppuku like this really necessary? If
what he did was illegal, he should face prosecution. If he's compelled to
apologize and admit his guilt, he should reach out to the people he actually
wronged. This kind of public self-flagellation ("I'm such a creep. Please
forgive me, world.") feels really over the top, phony, and symbolic.

~~~
adriand
Totally agree. There's something very weird about this post. If I were truly
faced with the sudden realization that I was a deeply shitty person, I can't
imagine writing a post like this. I'd be off the grid entirely, probably
drinking in a ditch some place. I know I can't speak for others and everyone
is different, but the human element is missing here somehow. It does feel very
PR.

~~~
jmcgough
His career depends very much on his reputation, and his reputation was just
dragged through the mud over the past week. It's difficult to know whether
this introspection and contrition is genuine, but his post is all about
salvaging his name.

~~~
chris_wot
Even if it isn't genuine (and it appears genuine to me) then it's a step
forward for a Silicon Valley head to recognise their actions are wrong.

------
siliconc0w
To make this a bit more abstract:

Bob is a big wheel over at SomeCompany. Bob is outside work drinking with some
friends, say Eve, and runs into Alice. Alice joins them and while she doesn't
currently work for SomeCompany she indicates to Bob she would like to join.
Bob, like most people, hangs out with a lot of people with similar
interests/skill-sets/abilities. As the night wanes, Bob flirts with Alice.
Alice declines Bob's advances. SomeCompany ends up not hiring Alice.

So where are we on the morality meter here? First, it is clearly inappropriate
to flirt with people you may want to hire. Obviously. But the empathetic side
of the argument is that just because you're a big wheel at the cracker factory
that shouldn't mean you can never go 'off the clock' and do things humans tend
to do like try to get laid. Work and life have become so blended for so many
people it's unrealistic to expect this not to happen. We created this culture
of 'living to work' and this is a consequence. We should expect these sorts of
messy situations to occur and build sane rules/expectations around them. But
go ahead and throw stones/downvote/ act outraged. That'll solve the problem.

~~~
chasing
I think you're right: Alice has established from the start that it's a
professional relationship. Continuing to flirt with her is inappropriate.
There's no work-life balance element to this: Bob's welcomed to try to get
laid. But he should find someone else. Other fish in the sea.

For better or worse, that's one of the trade-offs of being a "big wheel." You
have to consider how your actions might affect a whole constellation of people
around you.

------
cylinder
I've got to wonder, why do coworkers go out for drinks if it's not a social
setting? I don't understand the logic of mixing alcohol with colleagues if
you're still under the "workplace" umbrella.

~~~
ams6110
I don't really understand socializing with co-workers outside of work under
any circumstances, but especially with intoxicants involved. This includes
company holiday parties, etc. Let work be work, and keep your social life
separate. I've seen far more bad than good come out of such things.

~~~
tarr11
Although the percentage is declining, many relationships still begin at work
[1]

The real issue is a power imbalance, but this issue also exists in other
settings as well.

Alcohol inhibits your judgement, but many people can successfully consume
alcohol without adverse social consequences.

[https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/03/08/how-m...](https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/03/08/how-
much-life-has-changed-in-one-incredible-chart-about-dating/)

~~~
pvaldes
This cut both ways. Power inbalance has the problem that sex is a extremely
common strategy for gaining power in human societies. Predators can take any
side on the relationship.

~~~
saghm
All the more reason not to engage (or attempt to initiate) a sexual or
romantic relationship with a subordinate or superior.

~~~
pvaldes
Well, the problem is that then all we would have is a closed caste system,
that is a very undesirable situation in itself and much worse.

~~~
thehardsphere
Uh, no.

You know it used to be that men and women didn't work together, right? Like,
this idea of being able to date at work has only been around for about 50
years or so, while the human race has been around for thousands. Somehow we
figured out how to reproduce in the West without a "closed caste system" just
fine. You can too, without dating anyone at your job.

------
cyberferret
I don't know the guy aside from what I have read in the press (both good and
bad), but I'd like to think he wrote this with genuine sincerity.

Hopefully this is the start of a groundswell trend of traits such as
'accountability' and 'taking responsibility for your actions' becoming
fashionable and an expected part of human behaviour again.

~~~
ceejayoz
Call me cynical, but I suspect all these apology posts are written largely by
the poster's PR firm.

~~~
an_account
This one sounds pretty genuine. With something of this nature you'd be stupid
not to have PR people help out, but it does sound genuine.

It sounds like he's stepping back and taking a very hard look at his actions
and behavior. Hopefully he improves and doesn't do the same in the future.

Also, hopefully other similarly situated people see this and learn from his
(now very public) mistakes.

~~~
ceejayoz
The best PR is usually going to be PR that doesn't sound like PR. I do hope
people learn from this, but I tend to be dubious of "I've changed!" statements
immediately after getting caught.

~~~
thehardsphere
Well, let's be fair here: He didn't say "I've changed" he said "I am trying to
change." And this isn't necessarily immediately after getting caught, but
after the story was published in the New York Times; it's implied earlier that
other people in the company approached him and explained to him that his
behavior was unacceptable.

I think it's PR, but that doesn't automatically mean he isn't genuinely
apologizing. The two are not mutually exclusive.

------
hendzen
Caveat, McClure's behavior was bad. But seeing recent public floggings for
misbehavior I now wonder if people are feeling a bit hypersensitive/cautious
about any workplace conduct that could potentially be perceived as harassment.

Case in point. You work at a technology company. You are attracted to another
coworker, who is NOT your subordinate. Is there some manner in which it is
acceptable to express your interest? Or is this just not OK at all?

~~~
spamizbad
I think asking coworkers out is a huge no-no. If the only people in your orbit
you feel you can connect with that way are at work, that's a sign your
personal life needs some development. However, let's say you have a robust
personal life, and you just have this absolutely amazing co-worker, who
totally is not your subordinate, and ideally you don't even work directly
with, and you want to ask them out... again.. I discourage it.... but:

Ask them out someplace public outside of work. If they say no, that means no,
and just drop it. If you hear "I don't know, I don't really like to date
coworkers" that's also a no - don't push the issue. If they say "I don't think
that's a good idea" \- also a no. If they say "Eh....." or laugh or whatever,
it's a no, and just drop it.

Be aware a no could make things really awkward for you two, and it may even
piss off your co-worker who perhaps viewed you as this great work friend but
now thinks things are weird. It can hurt them in other ways: they may also
blame themselves for not being more into you, and question if they lead you
on. So if you get rejected, just say "Hey that's cool. It was a long-shot, I
understand."

~~~
mrmondo
'Asking out co-workers is a huge no-no' \- to me this feels almost anti-
humanist to the point where business is truly more important than our own
lives, our being, our existence and our own free will. There is a massive
difference between asking out co-workers and sexual harassment.

~~~
Aron
I agree. Answers like the above one indicate a level of dystopia/fear that
itself is concerning. Friendship on any level is highly dependent on proximity
in space and time. We need to be aware of how our righteous minds work and
stop throwing stones all over the place.

~~~
mrmondo
Exactly my feelings, I wouldn't hire someone into my team that I didn't think
couldn't become my friend should the situation play out as such, it just seems
logical to me.

~~~
watwut
That sounds like pretty dysfunctional hiring process, no matter what gender of
candidate.

------
coss
Reading these comments makes me really depressed for the future of our
society. Let me get this straight -

1\. Don't go out with co-workers. 2\. Don't make friends with co-workers. 3\.
Def. never drink with co-workers.

Have we really become this sensitive? There's a voice in me that's screaming
'fuck off' to this kind of attitude. I can't quite articulate why it
infuriates me so much.

~~~
chasing
That's what you've taken from all of this? Don't drink with co-workers?

I don't think that's what's causing the outrage, here...

~~~
thatswrong0
I'm pretty sure OP is referring to a bunch of other comments here that were
saying those exact things - that to avoid such a situations from arising in
the first place, refrain from doing anything non-work related with coworkers.

Which is all hilarious to me because I'm friends with a lot of my coworkers,
drink with them, and even have had the audacity to casually (and mutually)
flirt with a couple of them. Based on what I've been reading in these
comments, my career ought to be crumbling down by now.

I think some commenters are focusing too much on the non-professional aspect
and not enough on the power-imbalance aspect presented in some of these cases.

------
welcome_dragon
I for one am happy to see a true apology here, not an "I'm sorry if I offended
you" statement that so many people make the days.

This has all the points of a proper apology: an understanding of the wrong
committed, acknowledging that it was his fault, and demonstrating commitment
to change. It also appears to be sincere

~~~
ithinkinstereo
It's a qualified apology. I dislike how he not-so-subtly tries to justify his
actions by painting a context that delegitimizes Sarah's claims.

It's worth noting that Sarah claims that many other women contacted her with
similar stories of harassment, the fact that all of them are also women of
color is especially telling (as were all of Caldbeck's victims).

I mean if he wants to bring up contextual details, maybe McClure should
mention that like Caldbeck, he is also married. So how more scummy can you be?
A sexist harasser _and_ an adulterer. These guys are only sorry they got
caught and are now back pedaling to save some face.

People need to understand that this type of behavior causes terrible damage on
the victims which can last for years and often leave permanent scars. So it's
especially fucked up and unjust that people like McClure and Caldbeck, when
caught, can simply make a half-assed -- and in the case of Caldbeck and Sacca,
narcissistic -- apology; lay low for a few months; and then jump right back as
if nothing happened.

For fuck's sake one of the LPs at Binary _knew_ about Caldbeck's reputation
and harassment issues _and_ still invested.

------
SeeDave
Not sure what to say, or how to make things whole for his victims as there is
a very wide spectrum of consequence between 'boys will be boys' and capital
punishment.

I really encourage him to think in terms of 'next steps' to make amends when
it comes to those affected by his behavior. Anything less, in my completely
and totally unqualified opinion, is but self-serving lip service.

------
dbg31415
A HUGE percentage of couples meet through work.

It's not inherently wrong, or something inherently taboo. (We've all been told
not to stick our pens in the company ink, but... time and time again we also
see examples of happily married couples who met on the job... Bill Gates' wife
worked for Microsoft, The Obamas met while they were working together, Ryan
Reynolds & Blake Lively met on the set of Green Lantern...)

So it feels like the message here is, "It's fine when it works, and it's
totally not fine when it doesn't work." The only way to know if it's fine is
to ask. It's not really something you can make universal rules for. To each
their own, right? (I would say a wedding ring means someone is off limits, but
affairs happen all the time too.)

Point being, it has to be something more than, "It's OK to hit on someone if
they are attracted to you." I think hitting on someone is inherently a
compliment. But if they say no, and you try again, and they still say no, well
probably don't try a third time. This guy is apologizing for being called a
creep after hitting on someone once... man, that's rough. You don't know until
you try.

There needs to be a little more flex here, it can't just come down to, "Anyone
who we don't feel attraction to should be fired if they pay us a poorly worded
compliment or tell a bad joke." Stalkers, sure... people who try and leverage
their position in the company to get laid (with the implication), yeah... but
just some guy who tries to clumsily flirt with a girl and can't play it smooth
because he's fundamentally not a player and actually likes her... come on, cut
that guy some slack.

~~~
ceejayoz
Much of the issue isn't just "meeting through work", but the power imbalance.
Of your examples, only Gates includes this imbalance.

I don't know the specifics of their situation, but I'd hope that he recused
himself from being directly involved in her performance reviews etc., whereas
McClure was _explicitly_ tying his attraction to the hiring decision - "I was
getting confused figuring out whether to hire you or hit on you."

~~~
dbg31415
I'd be more worried about the guy who she says no to who keeps coming. Poor
judgement... maybe, but who knows what signals he was reading into the
situation at the time. He just sounds like a guy who doesn't have a lot of
experience with women, and he tried to make a joke and it didn't go well. Now
he's gotta read about his failed flirtation attempts in the NYT. That's gotta
be rough.

If he was overt, or repetitive, or really sleazy... yeah sure, I'm not on his
side. But to me this just comes off as a guy who hit on someone who was out of
his physical league and she didn't appreciate it (probably also because she
didn't get offered a job). I don't think Dave McClure deserves to be crucified
over this.

~~~
ceejayoz
> If he was overt, or repetitive, or really sleazy... yeah sure, I'm not on
> his side.

The apology explicitly states "I made advances towards _multiple_ women in
work-related situations, where it was _clearly_ inappropriate."

~~~
dbg31415
I'd be more worried if he made multiple advances to the same woman after being
shot down multiple times by that woman. That's harassment.

He's just... well... he seems like a really lonely guy.

~~~
julianmarq
You might have had a point in your first comment, now you're just defending a
guy who won't even defend himself, for some reason.

~~~
dbg31415
Fair, it's late and I was just trying to clarify my point.

This whole thread is toxic.

Nothing but polarized opinions. I'd like it if there was more middle ground,
and a lot less emotionally-charged up/down votes. When the points start
feeling like Reddit, it's a huge turnoff.

------
camgunz
I think it's clear from these comments that all companies, everywhere, are
doing a terrible job with their sexual harassment training. When otherwise
highly intelligent and educated people haven't even heard of power imbalance
or hostile work environments, or "intent is irrelevant", this is a huge
problem.

If you're running a company, please make it a priority to start real,
meaningful sexual harassment training right now. Good god.

~~~
draw_down
I couldn't believe the guy here who was like, sure I heard the constant
accusations, but I never believed they were actually _true_!

I mean, what will it take to make people believe that this problem is real?!

------
throwcatch
You have to assume all of these apologies are written with the help of PR
firms and crisis management teams. Sacca’s was the most obviously phony, which
makes sense since he’s trying to protect his new TV career.

There are way more of these creeps than these stories will let out. It really
depends how well connected you are to the media machine in SV. Binary Capital
and 500 are both too small and irrelevant to cause problems for the reporters
breaking these stories, but what about Peter Thiel’s friends? You can’t even
talk about them without worrying about going bankrupt.

There are a lot of women out there who are watching these stories and saying
absolutely nothing, because they know the odds are still stacked against them.
Exposing a couple mid tier guys doesn’t mean anything.

------
Skylled
I don't like this world where every social interaction could have drastic,
long-lasting effects on my reputation. Where every employee's word/deed is
taken as a company action, unless otherwise specified.

I'm human, and I'm fallible. I will make, or have already made, a bad decision
that someone else will be able to hold over me for the rest of my life.

People need to be allowed to make mistakes so they can learn from them. Not be
crucified to make an example for others.

Good for him for apologizing. I don't envy his position. It's lonely at the
top.

------
luord
I'm not going to congratulate this guy or call him brave or anything, and I'm
just going to mention that I consider this proof that speaking up against
unfair treatment (in this case, harassment) _can_ have an impact.

The only thing I'm going to commend about this post is that it's nice that
he's trying not to bring the company (and thus, his colleagues) down with him.

~~~
jjeaff
Presumably a large amount of his net worth is tied up in this company. So of
course he doesn't want to take it down.

------
Dzugaru
I can't help it but I can't find any reason to consider this as having > 0
information. You are absolutely forced and 100% expected to do this in a
situation now, right?

I, honestly, find this very disturbing (black mirror way), regardless of my
opinion on the matter at hand.

~~~
nulldev
> You are absolutely forced and 100% expected to do this in a situation now,
> right?

Not remotely. Just look at any of the recent Fox News harassment scandals, or
literally anything involving the current POTUS.

------
stevebmark
Refreshing to see an actual apology instead of a digging in of heels common to
tech industry shittiness (see: Notch). The apology may(?) be cathartic for the
people he's harassed but the damage is done. He's only apologizing as a forced
response from the major public backlash. The only silver lining I see is
others will be (and are) scared about this kind of behavior which used to go
unchecked.

------
rhizome
One thing I'd like to see from these people on the inside is some sense of
where this comes from. Where did they learn it? What does it say about others
in the VC club who saw something and said nothing? This stuff has obviously
been condoned for years and years and years, he should help dismantle it more
than falling on his own sword. Reveal the secret handshake(s).

------
neurotech1
His response reminded me of the famous 'Asoh Defense', when Captain Kohei Asoh
accidently put a perfectly good plane into the water on approach to SFO [0]

> Asoh, when asked by the NTSB about the landing, reportedly replied, "As you
> Americans say, I f__d up." In his 1988 book The Abilene Paradox, author
> Jerry B. Harvey termed this frank acceptance of blame the "Asoh defense",
> and the story and term have been taken up by a number of other management
> theorists.

I believe Dave McClure taking responsibility for his mistakes in such a strong
way is a step towards repairing the damage caused by his inappropriate
behavior.

[0]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japan_Airlines_Flight_2#The_.2...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japan_Airlines_Flight_2#The_.22Asoh_defense.22)

~~~
draw_down
One could also term it "adult behavior".

------
foolfoolz
when this happens it goes beyond just being a creep at work. the people you do
this may fear retaliation for reporting the incident, work with you after (he
still works at the company), and face down skeptics who can belittle what
happened

this post shows some thoughtfulness, but my reaction is "stay far away from
this person and this company"

------
salmonellaeater
Assuming McClure follows through by 1) refraining from harassing any more
people and 2) making things right with the particular people he hurt, it
doesn't matter whether he is sincere or not. How would you even tell what's in
his mind? What matters is that he has changed the common knowledge of what
behavior he publicly endorses (or in this case, condemns) [1]. His apology is
proof of sorts that he will follow a better standard of behavior, because now
he stands to be treated as a liar and hypocrite on top of the normal
punishment if he backslides.

From our side, if we as a community continue to denigrate him even after he
has done the most he possibly could to change the moral consensus on this
topic for the better, we're going to discourage others from apologizing and
drive them to deny. Why bear the cost of admitting you're wrong if there's no
benefit?

[1] I highly recommend Rational Ritual: Culture, Coordination, and Common
Knowledge by Michael Suk-Young Chwe for a game-theoretic exploration of topics
like this.
[http://press.princeton.edu/titles/9998.html](http://press.princeton.edu/titles/9998.html)

------
bluetwo
As someone once said, "You can offer an excuse or you can offer an apology,
but you can't offer both."

I'm not sure which this is. It sounds to me like both.

~~~
macspoofing
That's probably correct. His 'apology' included a contradiction of certain
statements made in the NY Times story by the woman he harassed, specifically
that her rejection of him was the reason she was not being hired by his
company. I think he wanted that on the record.

------
rmason
I was pretty critical on here just yesterday about Dave McClure. I'd never met
him in person but felt like his behavior was unlike the guy I felt I knew from
his writings and interviews.

This is heads above the apologies from Justin Caldbeck and Sacca though I
wished he'd written it months ago, back when the changes at 500 Startups were
first made. It's a good start, but only the beginning.

------
mrmcd
I wish there was a way to give imaginary internet upvote points to all the
people who didn't act like harassing shitheads, but I guess we're stuck with
giving them to this asshole, who whines about "this isn't who I am!" and "I
invested in so many of my LGBTQ friends!" months or years afterwords when
finally called out on it.

~~~
draw_down
Yes, there is something infuriating about this cycle of become rich acting
like a jackass -> get called out -> write some apology blog post -> get
showered with praise for doing the bare minimum as a human. Of course doubling
down and not apologizing is worse, but I guess at some point you have to ask
_materially_ , what really is the difference.

Women entrepreneurs who had trouble getting funded because VCs could only
think about their dicks, what do they gain from this?

------
ge96
This is how I feel anytime I want to ask a girl out, that I'll come across as
a creep haha. I should probably stop watching them through their window.

Edit: this reminds me of the Dove guy from American Apparel happened to listen
to some podcasts (too many) about him.

I just wish I believed in myself more and wasn't so hesitant/worry about
"getting in trouble"

------
masondixon
> During the recruiting process, Mr. McClure, a founder of 500 Startups and an
> investor, sent her a Facebook message that read in part, “I was getting
> confused figuring out whether to hire you or hit on you.”

Its interesting to think about what this would be like if the roles were
reversed. The VC was female, and the applicant was male.

As a male in this situation I see this as completely neutral, even positive.
If the founder likes me, then I have more chance of getting a highly sought
after role which I might not have otherwise - as no company really hires
solely on merit anyway. As a male, if there is a female HR contact, I would
always welcome them flirting with me, as it only increases my chances of
getting the job by giving me points when there are subjective evaluations
required.

If I was single and interested in this female VC its a clear opening for a
date. If I am attracted to her, I could have a date. If not, I could just
laugh it off and say I'm already seeing someone. Life moves on.

Now if I push back an advance, they might get petty and decide to not hire me
as some kind of revenge, or otherwise, they may be more likely to hire me
because they want me around.

\---

Now, obviously this is not a 1-1 analogous situation because of the world as
it is today. Some notable differences...

\- There are more male VCs than females. \- There are probably less female
applicants for such positions. \- Males are the physically stronger sex. \-
Males are more likely to make advances than females (is this true?).

So I am interested in which of these above variables must be inverted to
change my reaction. I need to think more on it.

But an interesting aspect is that, perhaps males think like this, and
therefore think its okay. I am guessing that its the other gender imbalance
variables that make this not applicable vise-versa, which is harder for males
to play out in their mind.

~~~
bichiliad
I'm not sure I totally agree with your comments. In particular:

> Now if I push back an advance, they might get petty and decide to not hire
> me as some kind of revenge

I think this is precisely the reason that it's inappropriate, regardless of
gender. Even if you (as a hypothetical VC) aren't going to be petty (and let's
be honest, emotions are complicated and keeping feelings out of a decision is
hard), you've put out the idea that your advances are somehow related to the
recruitment process. This will totally make someone uncomfortable, especially
when they're probably already sweating about the recruiting process.

~~~
masondixon
> This will totally make someone uncomfortable, especially when they're
> probably already sweating about the recruiting process.

But from a male perspective (in the hypothetical above), I don't see it at
all. I only see it as positive, and I think most males would feel the same. If
there were repeated advances, then it would get a bit frustrating. And if I
didn't get the job after knocking back repeated advances, then I would
definitely see who I could contact about it.

------
josh_carterPDX
This is a very Dave-like apology and I hope it leads to meaningful change for
him as it's clearly creating a bigger conversation. I believe in second
chances and I really hope we see Dave back into the trenches. He's done a lot
for the industry and it'll be interesting to see if he's welcomed back.

------
FT_intern
I'm not sure if creep is the best word to use here. Creep is a gendered term
like slut or bitch.

~~~
Aron
So it would be weird if he called himself a bitch maybe, but he is a male
calling himself creep, so I'm confused.

------
r3vo
Can someone explain to me what he did exactly?

I know he messaged a woman saying "I don't know if I should hire you or hit on
you."

What kind of environment were they in? Were they hanging out socially or
professionally? Was she formally in a recruitment process with his firm?

It seems to me that they were in a socially ambiguous situation and that
McClure interpreted the environment wrong and did some innocuous flirting.
This doesn't seem like a huge deal to me.

This stepping down from his job and public self-flagellation seems overblown
to me but I feel like I may not fully understand what his actions exactly
were.

------
hellopat
I find that he mentions the situation occurred "over drinks" a way to make it
seem less innappropriate. It's pretty simple, don't hit on women you have a
business relationship with. I've seen it happen on multiple occasions and I
cringe every time.

------
pjzedalis
He completely misses the forests from the trees.

Had the woman been hired she would have been denied by him the satisfaction of
knowing she earned the position through her hard work, intelligence, and
capabilities.

He also does not seem to recognize why he is a creep. Ultimately we find
people creepy when they portray themselves and their motives one way and yet
secretly or covertly act another.

I recommend therapy so that he can identify his true desires and motivations
and then realign his life to optimize for them.

~~~
mojowo11
Not to be confrontational here (or argue with your primary point), but I'm
pretty sure you didn't read the whole post. It says in the post that he's been
going attending regular counseling already.

~~~
pjzedalis
Good catch. I did read that but misplaced it when replying.

I am glad he is seeking help but I hope its for purposes of identifying his
desires/behaviors and not only mandated by circumstance.

~~~
nulldev
> I did read that but misplaced it when replying.

This is some of the most ridiculous phrasing I've ever come across.

~~~
pjzedalis
It is to admit that I could have said "glad to see he is in therapy and hope
he finds his true motivations" but I forgot he mentioned it because it is
besides the point. The objective of my comment was to throttle down the "creep
shaming" going on in this forum and several others.

Many people sometimes act creepily without even being aware of it. A little
empathy as to how the other person feels and what their goals are can help one
treat them with the respect they deserve. Hopefully the author can discover
when his various desires are appropriate to express in context of the
circumstances at hand.

------
partycoder
Doesn't count. The true character of a person is revealed when there's no one
around to punish bad behavior.

------
throwaway47861
Meh, nice-written copy-paste apology I guess.

It changes nothing. In my eyes he has a stain for life. Exactly how it should
be.

------
Aron
Loses his job. Major strike on his career. National public shaming. I'm gonna
click the link and go see what murderous crime he committed.

~~~
geofft
People lose their job for all sorts of reasons, no crime necessary. If you're
going to worry about people losing their jobs, why don't we start by talking
about everyone laid off at Etsy, and importantly, the college kids who were
informed two weeks before their internship started that no such internship
existed any more?

As for career and public shame: he's had a wildly successful career and
significant public praise in his lifetime. I think he can deal with it.

As I wrote in another thread, take a look at Brendan Eich. If losing your job
and being publicly shamed leads to being in charge of a well-funded, well-
respected growing startup with a real product (plus whatever net worth he has
from his previous employment, none of which was taken from him), I would like
to know how to sign up to be publicly shamed like that.

~~~
Aron
i.e. 'if they are powerful, nothing done to them can be called injustice'
progressive.

~~~
geofft
As with most things in real life, my thoughts here are quite a bit more
complex than a half-sentence inaccurate absurdist reduction plus an unrelated
political label at the end. Are you interested in having discussions involving
multiple complete sentences, or have I wasted my time replying?

~~~
Aron
With power comes great responsibility. If we want to move forward with the
changes we want to see in the tech culture to something more hospitable to
all, we need to highlight those people most responsible for shaping it when
they behave poorly. It's inappropriate to be overly concerned about how the
offending party is punished since they will likely recover and improve as
people in the process. Or even in the case where this is not true, the benefit
to the many of calling out their behavior is far more important. And anyway,
losing your job and going through an apology/shaming shitstorm is not really
that big a deal for someone with his resume. There are plenty of examples of
people that went on to better things subsequently.

------
tekstar
This reminds me of when Jiam Ghomeshi made a post about being into S&M right
before his accusers charged him with rape.

------
SirLJ
Pure PR, if he is really sorry, he should resign from all positions with
"power" over other human beings...

~~~
nulldev
If he were truly sorry he would retreat to a mountain lair to live out the
rest of his days as a monastic hermit. Clearly the fact that he still has a
keyboard to type on proves his insincerity. /s

~~~
SirLJ
A 500 Startups partner just quit, saying leadership was untruthful about the
Dave McClure situation

[http://www.businessinsider.com/500-startups-partner-quits-
ci...](http://www.businessinsider.com/500-startups-partner-quits-cites-firms-
handling-dave-mcclure-charges-2017-7)

------
unityByFreedom
Good on this guy for owning up. Now he has a chance to move on without trying
to live his life as a lie.

------
seibelj
I keep a 100% wall between work and personal life for a reason. Anyone I'm
doing business with I see at best as a coworker or business acquaintance, so
there is no risk of merging those two realms.

If you are powerful man or woman, you should be aware that people who know who
you are treat you differently. This Dave McClure guy actually thought all
these women were into him purely because he was some amazing dude and not
because he could finance their dreams. What a moron

~~~
protomyth
Not commenting on this case, but Billy Graham, after seeing what happened to
other well know preachers, was never alone with any woman except his wife
Ruth. It is a pretty good strategy. Today, a powerful person could probably
enhance his/her personal security by having an assistant with an always on
camera like some police forces use.

~~~
bdcravens
He may have been protecting himself from others, but also protecting himself
from himself? I don't feel Billy Graham was eager to cheat, but he recognized
his potential for giving in to temptation, and made specific choices ahead of
time to minimize his risk.

~~~
2muchcoffeeman
> _He may have been protecting himself from others, but also protecting
> himself from himself?_

Does it matter? The fact is, if you are a man in a position of power, never
being alone in a room with a woman you don't know very well, is starting to
sound like a reasonable strategy.

People in other threads have said, that limiting your one-on-ones with women,
inhibits their opportunities (perhaps we should not have one-on-ones at all to
make that fair). But when there are other people in your life that you need to
"protect" from any scandals, I really can't blame these men for picking their
loved ones and reputations over "social justice".

This is one of those "going to get worse before it gets better" things.

------
newtem0
Is asking a woman if you can buy her coffee sometime sexual harrasment if you
do it at the workplace?

~~~
genieyclo
Yes.

~~~
macspoofing
No. That's not right. Don't be stupid.

People meet romantic partners and spouses at work all the time - are they all
sexual harassers?

The true answer is: "It depends".

~~~
genieyclo
Don't shit where you eat is a sensible, safe rule to live by; ymmv.

~~~
macspoofing
I wonder about people like you. Do you live in the real world, and interact
with real people? Do you have real friends? Because it doesn't sound like it.

Not dating your coworkers is a sensible rule that some people follow and some
companies may have policies around ... but a rule you have no hope in
expecting to be universally adhered to. Case in point: The sheer number of
(happy and unhappy) couples who met at work.

~~~
genieyclo
I've worked with plenty of workplace couples, I'm not casting aspersions on
them. It can and does work out great for many. I just personally believe in
separating work and life. Sorry for the un-nuanced answer.

~~~
macspoofing
Yeah, some nuance is lost when you label everyone who asks a co-worker out on
a date a 'sexual harasser'.

~~~
genieyclo
Not my intention, sorry you took it that way. What I'm trying to convey is: if
the original person asking the question was looking for advice, you probably
don't want to cross that line. Work is work. Other stuff is completely
separate.

I could totally be wrong and love of his/her/their life is out there in cube
H206. I'm just some person online.

------
throwawaycuz
The amount Sacca's been virtue signaling about gender equality, racism, how
much he loves his wife -- for the last 3 years -- I knew something was up.
When he started posting that he had moved to Montana, I got the feeling he was
in hiding.

------
nnfy
It sounds like people are underestimating the pervasive lonileness that even
successful young males experience in tech. This does create an incentive for
women to play a little loose with their professional behavior, and we only see
one side of the story here.

No, I don't mean to excuse McClure's behavior entirely; however, the fact that
many of these women did not immediately cease contact after innapropriate
advances, and continues to take advantage of funds and mentorship, suggests
that these women are at least partly culpable. This isn't victim blaming; when
you have hundreds of applicants to choose from/compete with, it isn't a
surprise that people use/accept sexual flirtation (and sometimes favors) to
get ahead/judge applicants.

People have been selling sex for thousands of years. The only novelty here is
the outrage.

~~~
BoiledCabbage
> It sounds like people are underestimating the pervasive lonileness that even
> successful young males experience in tech.

And again this comes up every single time. Just because someone is lonely
didn't mean they're entitled to sexually harass someone else. Nor does being
horny justify it. Nor does being angry justify violence.

Similarly the fact they have to now choose between throwing away financial
opportunity or acquiesce to this harassment is exactly why there is a law
there protecting people from it. In part, it's illegal to put people in a
position where they have to make that choice.

~~~
nnfy
>Similarly the fact they have to now choose between throwing away financial
opportunity or acquiesce to this harassment

And what of the situation in which women continue to associate with their
harassers? Do they truely have no liability? Why is it impossible to consider
the possibility of some women using sex to get ahead? Why does this have to be
such an absurdly one sided topic?

And yes, being lonely to the point of depression is indeed justification for
making initial advances which may be misconstrued as sexual harassment, when
monetary or other favors are accepted. If they do not cease when identified as
unwelcome, they become a problem, sure. But the onus is also on the victim to
communicate, and continued association is not only a mixed message, the victim
begins to take advantage of the sexual tension by leading the harasser on and
continuing to accept business favors.

In our rush to protect these women, whom we paint (unfairly and innacurately)
as defensless, we only consider the imbalance of power and totally ignore the
imbalance of sexual capital that is rife for exploitation especially by
females.

I also do not believe that down votes are designed to signal disagreement.

~~~
BoiledCabbage
> Do they truely have no liability?

Liability in being the victim of harassment?

> Why is it impossible to consider the possibility of some women using sex to
> get ahead?

It's not impossible to consider this, but this isn't what is being discussed.

> and continued association is not only a mixed message,

And again you keep missing the point. Continued associated is a result of a
_business relationship_. That's exactly the point. By continuing a
professional relationship with someone does not mean you are consenting to
further sexual advances that you've already declined.

> whom we paint (unfairly and innacurately) as defensless

Again noone is painting anyone as defenseless. You're view of this entire
picture is skewed. It is about being placed in situations that people
shouldn't have to be placed it. Or make decisions they shouldn't have to make.
That doesn't make anyone defenseless. Victims of sexual harassment (whether
men or women) have agency in life, it's just situations that they shouldn't be
put in.

------
julianmarq
> It's a qualified apology. I dislike how he not-so-subtly tries to justify
> his actions by painting a context that delegitimizes Sarah's claims.

What claims were "deligitimized" and how did he do it?

As for everything else you wrote I'll just say it must be awful living with
such a misanthropic view but, hey, you do you.

~~~
ithinkinstereo
Other posters agree with my read on his apology. While apologizing, McClure is
also simultaneously trying to water down Sarah's presentation of the story;
that the situation was more/less social in nature... specifically he says
stuff like:

 _... years ago over drinks, late one night in a small group ..._

 _... for my inappropriate behavior in a setting I thought was social, but in
hindsight was clearly not ..._

I mean, sure, the situation wasn't a formal interview, but by his omission, I
take it that it also wasn't a dinner or social outing with friends. He also
brings up that drinks were involved, but practically every company/vc
sponsored event in the valley has alcohol involved. That doesn't make it okay
to proposition an attendee you talked to about an open job position afterwards
over _FACEBOOK_ and bring up said job as part of your come-on. I mean this is
literally the textbook definition of sexual harassment.

McClure of course doesn't bring up this level of detail about all the other
instances where he sexually harassed women, probably because those instances
were in even _more_ formal settings and make him look like an even bigger
creep.

What is truly misanthropic are apologists like yourself who give guys like
this a pass because they write a nicely worded apology on medium after getting
caught. _Oh, he 's soooo sincere; and what a good guy he is; and did you know
that funded some LGBT initiative!_

Half of the posts on this thread keep on bringing up the issue of workplace
romance. It's a total red herring and a crock of shit. There are acceptable
and appropriate ways to flirt and date in the workplace (if you must). All it
takes is judgement and common sense. The vast majority of men deal with this
just fine, and if you're one of them, you should be outraged. Assholes like
McClure, and yes he is a _total_ asshole -- that's his whole shtick after all
-- poisons the well for us all. We must be unequivocal in renouncing this type
of shit. If he wants redemption and kudos he has to earn it, an apology on
medium is just the first (small) step. Any less, and you provide justification
and cover for the next asshole to behave similarly. His success, contributions
to the tech community, whatever, does not justify him demeaning and putting
another human being in a shit position -- moreso because he has the power, and
by his own admission, knowingly abused it to take advantage over someone is a
weaker position. Apologies, no matter how sincere, don't make up for the years
of anxiety, therapy, etc. that stuff like this can cause.

~~~
julianmarq
> He also brings up that drinks were involved, but practically every
> company/vc sponsored event in the valley has alcohol involved

So... he's not lying?

> That doesn't make it okay to proposition an attendee you talked to about an
> open job position afterwards over FACEBOOK and bring up said job as part of
> your come-on. I mean this is literally the textbook definition of sexual
> harassment.

Everyone knows that, _including the one who did it_ (at least, now he does).

> McClure of course doesn't bring up this level of detail about all the other
> instances where he sexually harassed women, probably because those instances
> were in even more formal settings and make him look like an even bigger
> creep.

As evidenced by him calling himself a creep and that being the _title of his
post_.

> What is truly misanthropic are apologists like yourself who give guys like
> this a pass

Did I give him a pass? No.

Did I say that what he did wasn't horrible? No.

Isn't it misanthropic to immediately assume those things about me when I
hadn't given you even the slightest suggestion on what I thought of his
behavior before this very reply, where I'm condemning it? Yes, it _is_
misanthropic. You just want to think the worst of everyone, and It. Is. Awful.

> what a good guy he is; and did you know that funded some LGBT initiative!

You know? If I were like you, I could easily point out how this poor phrasing
can be construed as homophobic, but I won't resort to that. Please.

> if you're one of them, you should be outraged.

I'm gay, and that I see the failings of the opposing side doesn't mean that I
think the harassers aren't appalling.

> Assholes like McClure, and yes he is a total asshole -- that's his whole
> shtick after all -- poisons the well for us all.

There are many different types of assholes, the ones like McClure aren't the
only ones "poisoning the well."

> Apologies, no matter how sincere, don't make up for the years of anxiety,
> therapy, etc. that stuff like this can cause.

Case in point.

> Other posters agree with my read on his apology.

This was a weird and non-sequitur opener, btw. Were you going for an appeal to
popularity or something? For what it's worth, I thoroughly disagree with your
read on his apology.

\---

BTW, _none of this answered my question_.

~~~
ithinkinstereo
I'd rather not turn this into a pedantic argument where we parse every word,
sentence, and phrase. But I'll respond because I think we prob agree more than
disagree and trust that you have good intentions and want a dialogue.

> So... he's not lying?

Yes, but my argument is that's besides the point; it's an irrelevant detail
entirely to whether or not his actions were totally inexcusable.

> Everyone knows that, including the one who did it (at least, now he does).

Yes, which is why it's completely indefensible.

> As evidenced by him calling himself a creep and that being the title of his
> post.

Agreed, McClure is a big creep, but him admitting it doesn't buy him many
brownie points in my book. He's admitting it because not doing so will make
things even worse for him. He really has no choice in this regards. I'd like
to believe he is _genuinely_ sincere, but given his own admitted history of
this type of behavior, and awareness of his own actions (which notably did not
prevent him from curtailing his creepiness), my default is he is only trying
to save face until proven otherwise.

> Isn't it misanthropic to immediately assume those things about me when I
> hadn't given you even the slightest suggestion on what I thought of his
> behavior before this very reply, where I'm condemning it? Yes, it is
> misanthropic. You just want to think the worst of everyone, and It. Is.
> Awful.

Pot meets kettle. What you are accusing me of doing, is what you are doing
yourself to me, no?

Like you, I don't want to think the worst of everyone, because that's not a
very fun world to live in. On the contrary, and like I've said repeatedly, I
think McClure is the exception rather than the norm. The majority of men in SV
and elsewhere don't behave like him and are not serial sexual harassers.

> You know? If I were like you, I could easily point out how this poor
> phrasing can be construed as homophobic, but I won't resort to that. Please.

I brought up the LGBT comment, because people are using 500 Startups's
historical support of women, POC, and LGBT initiatives to support McClure. I'm
pointing out how glib that line of defense is; that it is actually irrelevant;
and makes his behavior look all the worse, especially because his actions are
so textbook creepy -- not something you would expect from someone who
sincerely believes in enfranchising those who have been historically
marginalized.

> I'm gay, and the huge amount of false or exaggerated accusations is one of
> the many reasons I'm glad I am. And (because I know you're going to try to
> pull this thread), I'm not saying that the accusations against McClure were
> unfunded; he clearly admitted his blame.

That's great, and I'm a person of color, but that's irrelevant. His behavior
is objectively shitty and must be called out if we want to progress to a
better, more equal and civilized society. This is a legitimate issue in our
society; I don't think you can go too overboard calling out this type of
predatory behavior. It's a real issue with very real consequences for those
who are victim to it.

Also, you mention "huge amount of false or exaggerated accusations", but by
your own admission, and by McClure himself, all these accusations of him being
a serial creep are true. So not false, and not exaggerated.

> There are many different types of assholes, the ones like McClure aren't the
> only ones "poisoning the well."

Here is where I disagree with you. There might be more more poisonous apples,
but McClure is a real scumbag just by looking at what we know so far:

1) Serial history of this type of behavior 2) Self-awareness that his behavior
is bad. 3) Admission that his intent was to take advantage of others. 4) All
his accusers are women of color (according to Sarah)

> Case in point.

I don't know what you're trying to imply here.

> This was a weird and non-sequitur opener, btw. Were you going for an appeal
> to popularity or something? For what it's worth, I thoroughly disagree with
> your read on his apology.

Huh? You made the claim that my view was off-base and misanthropic. I disagree
and cite similar views from others to back that point.

> BTW, none of this answered my question.

Let me be more clear then, he tried to delegitimize the harassment by bringing
up irrelevant details (there were drinks involved, it was a small group of
people, that he thought it was a social event, etc.), that are designed to
water down the accusations, or at the least, are designed to give him some
sort of cover to "explain" his terrible behavior.

------
gavriel
This nerd thought it's okay because he's rich now. Well at least now he knows
his place lol.

------
80211
I'm not a creep! Where's my trophy?

------
atlih
All those examples give you the same or more power over them.

~~~
noobermin
When you're arrested, you have more power over the person who arrested you?

~~~
atlih
Not at all, until they express interest in you.

~~~
noobermin
This is very down in the weeds, but let me provide an example.

>I'm going to place you under arrest, but if you give me your number, I might
forget about it.

The power dynamic there favors the officer over you. If you don't yield to
him/er, you could face prison. That demonstrates the issue with power dynamic
leading to sexual harassment is that one with more power over the other
coerces them into yielding sexual favors that they otherwise would not consent
to.

~~~
atlih
Yes I understand that, but the power dynamic completely shifts when the
powerful party shows interest. You might get yourself out of handcuffs by
giving your or even a fake number if the powerful party is interested.

~~~
danek
That's not an example of "shifting the power dynamic"

------
imaginenore
Damn, that's a good apology. The guy seems to be working on fixing his
behavior.

------
pgroves
Best part is the woman who confronted the CEO about being a serial sexual-
harrasser and ended up CEO.

Edit: Re-reading I can't tell what his title was, only that she was CEO after
the fact.

~~~
hkmurakami
You mean his cofounder?

------
thejerz
[deleted]

~~~
cyberferret
But to differentiate ourselves from animals, we have this thing called
'civility'. We have the capacity to rationally think about our actions and
discard primate style behaviours that do not function in modern society.

Not too many city dwelling men use their narrow focal vision and instinctive
ability to calculate parabolic maths and wind speed to throw spears at dinner.

That means they should also curb their instinctive impulses to club the
nearest female and drag them back to the cave by her hair...

------
robtaylor
Money can't buy class and all that.

~~~
tunetine
It worked in Pretty Woman.

------
throwaway05285
Dave's biggest mistake here was actually referring her for a job after this
interaction. In the absence of that, it was a late night social event with
alcohol where Dave made a pass on a girl (who may or may not have been
signaling that this was appropriate as she was angling for a job) and she
didn't show interest. End of story.

------
opaol
I know a former executive at Homeland Security who was also a federal
prosecutor. He's now the head of security for a large company that owns luxury
condos.

When I reported a former roommate for prostituting teenage girls (my friends),
the security executive said they didn't want to know about it. This led to a
dispute and the executive called five of my colleagues, intimidated them and
told them lies about me.

The situation quickly devolved from there, involving a complicated tale of
criminal and civil charges.

It was shocking to realize how many guys think its okay to offer girls money
for sex, even if they're young.

------
voidhorse
This just feels like an save-face operation.

If these fellas want to show their commitment to changing it will require two
things in my opinion:

1\. A prolonged period of time without further incident.

2\. Perhaps some dedicated effort to supporting, monetarily or otherwise, the
elimination of this sort of behavior at the structural level? Start a campaign
against sexism/harassment or something? Though to make it not appear
disingenuous they ought to do so in a fake name--that's the problem when
you're outed as a manipulator in a position of power, literally every
subsequent move you make reads like manipulation. The McClure case as
described in the NYT article wasn't too extreme and it is possible that some
of it was misunderstanding and the he is being honest--it sounds like, for
instance, 500 could have decided to end their conversations with Kunst for
reasons beyond the message, but we'll never know. For instance I cannot help
but feel the majority of this piece is McClure looking out for McClure and not
giving a shit about actually being sorry. Of course I don't _know_ that, but
trust is difficult to regain.

Granted, McClure's fuck up does jive with the context he describes here, but
it just becomes very difficult to believe any of these apology letters are
genuine until some time has passed in which that is shown to be the case.

~~~
briandear
Does a campaign really accomplish anything? Campaigns just seem like a lot of
virtue signaling without any actual substance.

How about organizations simply deal with the problem? When there is a
complaint, investigate it. If it’s legitimate, discipline the perpetrator. If
it’s an unfounded or malicious claim, discipline the accuser.

It’s interesting how SV makes the news for this but sexual harassment/sleeping
to the top is standard operating procedure in Hollywood – the VC world makes
The NY Times while the everyday stuff that happens in Hollywood would make
your skin crawl.

While the SV problem exists, I can’t help but feel there is some agenda
happening as other power-centric industries don’t seem to get the ink that SV
does.

~~~
greglindahl
A campaign to change company HR policies can actually accomplish something. HR
policies set expectations. All companies have a policy against dating within
the chain of command. I bet that in the future, a lot of companies are also
going to have language about not starting relationships with suppliers,
customers, investors, etc. Given all of the mess with conferences, that could
use a little policy, too...

