Edit on Dec 26 2023: not sure itās worth people freaking this given the new nonlinear updates. I think it makes the below comment outdated. I donāt think I would still endorse the specific claims in this comment if i came back to it.
Re patterns of behaviorsāI believe I still disagree here. The way Iād summarize it (poorly) is something like: āNonlinear have a history of negative behavior towards employees, they have continued to demonstrate some negative behaviors, and have not acknowledged that some of their behavior was harmful to othersā (edited)
What I think constitutes a āpatternā:
Two employees had multiple negative experiences across a range of scenarios (e.g. financial, psychological/āsocial, legal) over the course of 7 months.
I think they have demonstrated a consistent pattern with at the very least intimidation tactics (re their email to Ben about this post).
Based on their responses of events (over a year later), it seems like Nonlinear team does not believe they have done any wrong. For many actions which they admit to doing (e.g. the driving or drugs incidents) seem like pretty clear red flags, they donāt see anything wrong with that behavior.
Edit: I no longer endorse the first sentence this based on Violetās comment below, and agree with her overall take here. I would be keen to see what aspects the Nonlinear team believe to be mistakes and what changes they made.
I think the above is still consistent with current/āfuture employees having a much more positive experience though, since as I said I think a lot of the problems were caused by the environment /ā co-living situation.
I do think itās strange /ā unfortunate that Ben didnāt interview you given how the conclusion is stated. I still agree with the end-line conclusion though, I think itās possible there could still be situations where others could have negative experiences.
Re Adorian DeckāI hadnāt read much about the Adorian Deck incident, based on what your summary I think it does sound less bad than I would have initially thought. I also think that including that quote about standard deviation seems a bit extreme.
Kat explicitly acknowledges at the end of this comment that ā[they] made some mistakes ā¦ learned from them and set up ways to prevent themā, so it feels a bit unfair to say that that Non-Linear as a whole hasnāt acknowledged any wrongdoing.
OTOH, Benās testimony here in response to Emerson is a bit concerning, and supports your point more strongly.[1] Itās also one of the remarks Iām most curious to hear Emerson respond to. Iāll quote Ben in full because I donāt think this comment is on the EA Forum.
I did hear your [Emersonās?] side for 3 hours and you changed my mind very little and admitted to a bunch of the dynamics (āour intention wasnāt just to have employees, but also to have members of our family unitā) and you said my summary was pretty good. You mostly laughed at every single accusation I brought up and IMO took nothing morally seriously and the only ex ante mistake you admitted to was ānot firing Alice earlierā. You didnāt seem to understand the gravity of my accusations, or at least had no space for honestly considering that youād seriously hurt and intimidated some people.
I think I would have been much more sympathetic to you if you had told me that youād been actively letting people know about how terrible an experience your former employees had, and had encouraged people to speak with them, and if you at literally any point had explicitly considered the notion that you were morally culpable for their experiences.
This is only Benās testimony, so take that for what itās worth. But this context feels important, because (at least just speaking personally) genuine acknowledgment and remorse for any wrongdoing feels pretty crucial for my overall evaluation of Non-Linear going forward.
I also sympathize with the general vibe of your remark, and the threats to sue contribute to the impression of going on the defensive rather than admitting fault.
Thatās fair point regarding Katās commentāI would be curious to know what kind of changes they made.
I hadnāt seen the testimony re Ben so thanks for sharing that, would definitely like to see response /ā engagement on this point from Emerson as well.
I think given what you know, your level of skepticism is reasonable here.
I mean, obviously, Iām disagreeing based on my subjective experience/āknowledge. But these are reasonable concerns for an outside observer to have. My take is that how unreasonable this level of defensiveness is, would vary based on how true the actual claims are. If theyāre say, 80% false, vs 80% true.
And honestly, even the most charitable interpretation states that Nonlinear team really dropped the ball on communicating to employees and frequently says a lot of weird, shady stuff. So Iām not gonna pretend like Nonlinear does nothing wrong, just because theyāre āmy teamā.
I mean, for all I know, thereās 2 parties each claiming the other maintains a complex web of deception and lies, and I might be believing the wrong one š¤
Edit on Dec 26 2023: not sure itās worth people freaking this given the new nonlinear updates. I think it makes the below comment outdated. I donāt think I would still endorse the specific claims in this comment if i came back to it.
Re patterns of behaviorsāI believe I still disagree here. The way Iād summarize it (poorly) is something like: āNonlinear have a history of negative behavior towards employees, they have continued to demonstrate some negative behaviors, and have not acknowledged that some of their behavior was harmful to othersā (edited)
What I think constitutes a āpatternā:
Two employees had multiple negative experiences across a range of scenarios (e.g. financial, psychological/āsocial, legal) over the course of 7 months.
I think they have demonstrated a consistent pattern with at the very least intimidation tactics (re their email to Ben about this post).
Based on their responses of events (over a year later), it seems like Nonlinear team does not believe they have done any wrong.For many actions which they admit to doing (e.g. the driving or drugs incidents) seem like pretty clear red flags, they donāt see anything wrong with that behavior.Edit: I no longer endorse the first sentence this based on Violetās comment below, and agree with her overall take here. I would be keen to see what aspects the Nonlinear team believe to be mistakes and what changes they made.
For the second sentence, I still endorse it based on Nonlinearās interview with Ben
I think the above is still consistent with current/āfuture employees having a much more positive experience though, since as I said I think a lot of the problems were caused by the environment /ā co-living situation.
I do think itās strange /ā unfortunate that Ben didnāt interview you given how the conclusion is stated. I still agree with the end-line conclusion though, I think itās possible there could still be situations where others could have negative experiences.
Re Adorian DeckāI hadnāt read much about the Adorian Deck incident, based on what your summary I think it does sound less bad than I would have initially thought. I also think that including that quote about standard deviation seems a bit extreme.
I donāt quite agree with your summary.
Kat explicitly acknowledges at the end of this comment that ā[they] made some mistakes ā¦ learned from them and set up ways to prevent themā, so it feels a bit unfair to say that that Non-Linear as a whole hasnāt acknowledged any wrongdoing.
OTOH, Benās testimony here in response to Emerson is a bit concerning, and supports your point more strongly.[1] Itās also one of the remarks Iām most curious to hear Emerson respond to. Iāll quote Ben in full because I donāt think this comment is on the EA Forum.
This is only Benās testimony, so take that for what itās worth. But this context feels important, because (at least just speaking personally) genuine acknowledgment and remorse for any wrongdoing feels pretty crucial for my overall evaluation of Non-Linear going forward.
I also sympathize with the general vibe of your remark, and the threats to sue contribute to the impression of going on the defensive rather than admitting fault.
Thatās fair point regarding Katās commentāI would be curious to know what kind of changes they made.
I hadnāt seen the testimony re Ben so thanks for sharing that, would definitely like to see response /ā engagement on this point from Emerson as well.
I think given what you know, your level of skepticism is reasonable here.
I mean, obviously, Iām disagreeing based on my subjective experience/āknowledge. But these are reasonable concerns for an outside observer to have. My take is that how unreasonable this level of defensiveness is, would vary based on how true the actual claims are. If theyāre say, 80% false, vs 80% true.
And honestly, even the most charitable interpretation states that Nonlinear team really dropped the ball on communicating to employees and frequently says a lot of weird, shady stuff. So Iām not gonna pretend like Nonlinear does nothing wrong, just because theyāre āmy teamā.
I mean, for all I know, thereās 2 parties each claiming the other maintains a complex web of deception and lies, and I might be believing the wrong one š¤
Guess weāll find out.
Yeah, I hope we will! Thanks for engaging with me in a productive and open way, this conversation has been helpful.