Why It's Safe for Founders to Be Nice

Re:Why It's Safe for Founders to Be Nice by XJOKOLAT on Friday August 28, 2015 @06:57PM (#10138255)

I don't know, I took it to be a more simpler commentary which made sense to me.

It's possible to be basically nice (firm, strong in your dealings, smart, deal-making, but nice all the same). Instead of being an archetypal asshole.

p.s. I recoil at the term "culture-fit", shivers down the spine. You make some valid points.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Why It's Safe for Founders to Be Nice by tbabb on Friday August 28, 2015 @07:42PM (#10138379)

I probably haven't had cause to encounter it for myself, but why does "culture fit" have a squicky connotation?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Why It's Safe for Founders to Be Nice by vectorjohn on Friday August 28, 2015 @08:42PM (#10138542)

Because it's code for people just like me. A way to discriminate in an illegal way and say it's culture fit.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Why It's Safe for Founders to Be Nice by mistermann on Friday August 28, 2015 @09:36PM (#10138648)

It's also a way of only hiring yes-men. People who aren't yes-men are often considered to "have an attitude" and "not a good fit".

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Why It's Safe for Founders to Be Nice by ryanSrich on Saturday August 29, 2015 @11:50AM (#10140372)

I think it can actually mean something. Often times you'll get folks who aren't used to the pace of startups. They think they're coming into a nice cushy gig. Startups are cut throat. Some folks just aren't cut out for that. They'd be better off going to work for Google or Apple.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Why It's Safe for Founders to Be Nice by cbr on Friday August 28, 2015 @08:35PM (#10138524)

It can be a euphemism for discrimination.

[ Parent | on HN ]