News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Google paid Andy Rubin $90M while keeping silent about a ... by klank on Thursday October 25, 2018 @02:07PM (#18303075)
I believe that policy will work for mid-level and lower-level employee where the reporting structure is their power.

However, for people like Rubin, the reporting structure isn't their power but their overall sway with the organization. In those cases it's not as easy to make a clear delineation along organizational boundaries.

Re:Google paid Andy Rubin $90M while keeping silent about a ... by bwilliams18 on Thursday October 25, 2018 @02:34PM (#18303344)
It's really not, when you're at that level (which I think is easy enough to define) you don't sleep with anyone in the company. At this point you should be a mature enough adult to be able to handle this, if you're not, you probably shouldn't be in a leadership role. If you're so enamored with someone then you leave. The workplace is a place for work, not a place to find a date. Do people date people they work with? Of course – and that's fine, but the second it gets in the way of the work it's a problem and needs to be handled, rarely can it be handled any other way than having one person leave.
Re:Google paid Andy Rubin $90M while keeping silent about a ... by ummonk on Thursday October 25, 2018 @04:27PM (#18304292)
Right. Even Travis Kalanick understood this.
Re:Google paid Andy Rubin $90M while keeping silent about a ... by village-idiot on Thursday October 25, 2018 @10:36PM (#18306342)
When you fail to clear an ethical bar that Kalanick cleared, it's time to stop and reconsider your life.
Re:Google paid Andy Rubin $90M while keeping silent about a ... by gowld on Thursday October 25, 2018 @02:15PM (#18303144)
Someone at that level can afford to pay for a matchmaking service and has plenty of willing strangers to date, and doesn't ned to go foraging among the staff.
Re:Google paid Andy Rubin $90M while keeping silent about a ... by klank on Thursday October 25, 2018 @11:16PM (#18306493)
Sure, I'm not meaning to be an apologist for people in Rubin's position.

Only meaning to say that a focus on organizational lines is not appropriate for somebody like that. The article itself points this out several times as if it should make a difference, however, I'd disagree. The power imbalance is too extreme, even for people not in the direct organizational chain.