A few weeks ago, Linch, Auckland (pseudonym), and I (Ruby) decided to chat about something and settled on this topic. What follows is a mix of distillation and edited chat (Slack) transcript.

Auckland and I (Ruby) start from the position that the Wave non-disparagement agreement is probably bad. Linch expresses uncertainty about whether, if broader society (or at least your local reference class) makes use of non-disparagement agreements, that makes it okay to use them yourself.

We discuss various possible examples of not-good behavior (non-consent, lying, bribing, saying “awesome” when you mean “mildly positive”) that people empirically engage in and/or seem more okay if everyone is doing them. We think about what “reference class” Wave is in, e.g. more general Silicon Valley vs EA.

A big is crux is whether Wave had been prompted to reflect on their non-disparagement agreement, and if so, their reaction. It might be that non-disparagements are bad, but you have to be paying attention to notice when you should be morally better than your surrounding society. Some employees wanting to negotiate out of the non-disparagement agreement seems like it was a prompt to reflect on it. Also how much the founders of Wave say “oops” when it’s pointed it out, vs defending the practice.

Beyond that, there’s a question of even if someone is not particularly blameworthy for engaging in a standard widespread not-good behavior, do you still want them in a leadership position? E.g. board of Effective Ventures/CEA? As opposed to wanting leaders who’d have the discernment to catch this kind of thing and not do it. We have some more discussion about who you want for EA leadership related to how good you think EA is.

Linch raises that non-disparagement agreements are in fact not legally enforceable. We all agree that it’s plausible EAs should push Wave to make an official declaration to void their non-disparagement agreements.

Background Context

In the discussion of Nonlinear's behavior, the topic of NDAs/other agreements that restrict employees speaking negatively of former employer's came up.

jefftk (permalink):

an NDA to prevent people from publicly criticizing their former workplace seems line-crossing to me.

I don't like these, but they are (were) depressingly common. I know at least one org that's generally well regarded by EAs that used them.

habryka (permalink):

Oh, wow, pl

...

Posts

Wikitag Contributions

Comments