Yes, it's the prerogative of a company to not want its work environment to be polluted with discussions that have no relationship to the tasks at hand.
It is human-focused to not pussyfoot around such decisions but to instead bring clarity to the table and allow humans to make their choice.
More companies should be like that and, in fact, in Europe, still are.
Human-focused, as long as the human is white and male.
When you make a communications service, you probably want to involve a wide range of perspectives to make sure you build a good product that doesn't contribute harm. Specifically with Hey, they've walked back a bunch of features (props for being reactive, I guess) after they got a modicum of feedback from people that don't look like the two founders.
"This is a great and important perspective we hadn’t considered" is a stunning example - You don't need to (and can't!) personally consider every perspective, but maybe if you involved more people in the product development process you get to catch these things before you release them. Human-focused.
Do you know how many people they did have working on this, or what people specifically were lacking to catch these? Do you have insight into what major problems they caught before release that they public never saw?
So human-being focused a third of their human-being employees quit after the CEO wrote a blog post! https://www.theverge.com/2021/4/30/22412714/basecamp-employe...