Zero tolerance policies give way too much power to people who might cry "wolf" to benefit their own careers.

Doesn't sound so intolerant. There is a 2nd chance given. But not a third.

Not as supportive of a second chance. Especially since this wording is part of the actual policy, not the soft sell leading up to it. I interpret it as: If I fuck up once, even if I recognize and own it, I will still be fired if the victim reports it.

This would seem to encourage silence and denial on the part of the accused, since owning up to it will be effectively a confession. And in such an environment, the power will reside almost entirely with the accusers, since I can't imagine the accused ever winning in a pure hearsay (i.e. no witnesses) investigation.

This appears to be both a clear zero-tolerance policy for sexual harassment, and an attempt to prevent anything near the border of harassment and illegal discrimination by addressing behavior which is not necessarily illegal but falls short of professionalism strongly (but without a “zero-tolerance” approach.)

[0] it says such treatment is unacceptable, then relates the consequences of discovery of such unacceptable behavior.

The crux is the investigation. Will it be a "we must have a clean image so any hint of impropriety will be pruned aggressively" or "we won't let unsubstantiated accusations derail a valuable employee" or somewhere in between?

Another question is, how will they handle the false accusers? A lot of questions to be clarified if you happen to be part of their ecosystem.

You have to be told what you are being accused of in advance.

You have to have a formal hearing with the right to be accompanied by a "friend" to put your case.

There has to be an valid appeals process.

Fail these and the employer will automatically loose

I'm sorry. I have no doubt the Foundry Group partners are good people (I've met and liked a few of them) but this disclaimer simply doesn't fly. If you really want to stand up for gender equality in tech, hire more women into the partnership. That would do far more than another blog post with a set of commitments that dance around that.

"We deeply appreciate the bravery of the women who have publicly come forward and disclosed their specific issues of sexual harassment. The behavior they experienced is not ok, has never been ok, and will simply not be tolerated by us in any way."

"That's not ok with us." LOL, I can hear the muffled echoes of smug boardroom back-pats from here.

Really? "a [VC] partnership of six middle-aged white men" lauding female bravery. This would be so much more interesting if they acknowledged discrimination in the industry and held up their company as an example of that. America isn't 100% white middle-aged men now is it? I mean, how does that happen, I'm multiracial myself and the people I spitball company ideas with certainly aren't all male nor are they all the same ethnicity. The infantile, forceful, moralistic writing makes this all the worse.

It absolutely flies. Just because YOU think they should be all or nothing doesn't mean they should. Maybe you should make a competing partnership and hire all women.

Hiring is not the only way to show support. Public statements apply pressure to other groups, signal that this place is a good place for women to do business with, etc.

Percentage of LGBTQ in U.S: 3.4%

Percentage of women in U.S.: 50%

LGBTQ individual that should be on board: 0.204

Percentage of women that should be on board: 3

Yea, they're full of shit. That's a 0% diversity score, so objectively they discriminate in employment. Like I said in my above post, I don't even understand (translated for you: It's fucking absurd) how this happens.

Would they treat it the same as a lawsuit accusing a male CEO of discrimination against women?

"If found to be valid, we will request an immediate termination of the harasser, regardless of job position."

So now if my CTO gets drunk and does something stupid, there is zero tolerance and my investors will demand his termination. This would be in the back of my head every time I sat across the interview table from a female. That if any of my social inept key staff make one mistake my business could be torpedoed.

2. from a female => from a female what? Alpaca? Oh human? We have a word for that, it's woman

3. social inept key staff => get past the idea that the only people who can get things done are Neanderthals that have to be catered at the cost of the safety of women

Female by itself is known to imply female human. When people say they have a kid, do you think they have goats at home?

Or you could hire a female CTO maybe.

... business could be torpedoed.

Your CTO could be hit by a bus at any moment and your business could be torpedoed, and if that wasn't in the back of your mind all the time already, why not?

You know what kind of business depends entirely on a single personality? A cult.

Multiple accusations or more definitive evidence should likely put the accused into a troubling situation.

These are all your problems, not someone else's.