I generally agree that companies are going to be inclined to signal social values when those values align with their own interests.<p>But I&#x27;m generally happy when the interests of companies line up with what I believe to be the interests of society as a whole.<p>Companies that go out of their way to be environmentally friendly are most often doing that in order to seize a marketing niche. That&#x27;s a signal sent with a profit motive. But that doesn&#x27;t bother me; why should it?<p>Like you, I do remain wary of the motives of companies when they send signals about social values. Their actions might not match the signals they&#x27;re sending, or, having firmly established those social values as part of their &quot;brand&quot;, they may cease serving those values altogether. I think it&#x27;s good to be wary of companies.<p>But I think we should be careful about about letting the <i>social values themselves</i> take flak due solely to that wariness. The ulterior motives of Slack are a <i>small</i> issue. Whichever way you feel about it, diversity is a <i>big</i> issue. Let&#x27;s not lose the forest for the shrubs.<p>I suspect we may not entirely agree about the merits of the particular social values (&quot;diversity&quot;, whatever) at stake here. I believe the underrepresentation of women and African Americans in tech is a major problem. But either way: you seem like a pretty reasonable person, so, thank you for being that way.