While transparency is admirable, I don’t find the “why I left Google” blog posts to be particularly interesting content to be posted to HN.

They happen relatively frequently and there are a number of things about them that feel distasteful:

- The authors are in the literal 1%, so for the 99% of us who are doing far worse it feels a bit like a tiny violin exercise.

“Sorry you worked for an unethical company, my company is unethical, too, and I can’t quit over morals or else my family won’t eat.

- Being in the 1% affords many of these individuals more options in life to work for ethical employees or pursue noble causes, and articles like this one makes you question why they just woke up to the reality they were benefitting from for so long. It seems like everyone on the outside has known about those moral quandaries for a while.

- The people who quit Google are one of 100,000 employees, which dilutes the value of hearing an individual story from someone who is leaving the company.

I imagine many Google people are interested, and they get voted up.

You don’t have to read and engage with everything on the front page. And you certainly don’t have to come make snarky criticisms of others.

I don’t feel like I was being “snarky.” I also have no problem with the articles being upvoted.

I don’t think it’s very fair to tell people who want to constructively criticize articles to just not engage with them. That feels like a deflection of my points rather than addressing the merit of what I actually said.

Instead of saying “here’s what was wrong with your idea” you said “you’re not supposed to be here.”

I genuinely think the author could read comments like mine and get something out of them.

I think it’s fair to say that if you are not interested to just move on, and not criticize having a discussion on that topic

Site guidelines say “thoughtful criticism is fine” and that’s my intention.

I think it's good when people share their opinions. No snark detected.