zlacker

>>femfos+(OP)
A female founder acquaintance of mine (who's quite smart and capable) went on a Twitter screed a couple weeks ago. As it turns out, someone else had copied her idea, and her startup now had a competitor. The competitor was also able to raise a solid amount of money despite her being first to market and her having more relevant knowledge of the problem space (by her own estimation).

So, this scenario isn't exactly uncommon in the startup world. It happens all the time. But because she's a minority female and her competitor is a white man, it suddenly becomes an example of white supremacy and the patriarchy conspiring to oppress her. The VCs who funded the competitor? Obviously racists and sexists, and she called them out explicitly as that on Twitter.

I considered reaching out to her to offer some perspective, but ultimately demurred. Why? I didn't want to be caught in the wurlitzer. Better to let her make more problems for herself than offer a sense of perspective that could get me cancelled.

>>scarmi+6O
We review social media for management level hires. One of the big red flags is exactly this - accusing people/companies/organizations of sexism/racism/xenophobia/illegal activity/etc without providing any material evidence.

This applies to both men and women, from any background. Even forgetting the potential for these accusations to be levied on us, it's simply a legal liability to have someone on the team that makes public accusations on social media without evidence.

The last thing anyone wants is a lawsuit magnet on the team. Lawsuits are extremely expensive, even when you win.