Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Abuse is indefensible

blog.mozilla.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 221 posts

Re: Abuse is indefensible

#121

Post by comex »

pervycreeper wrote: post #116
ceejayoz wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure ESR is the best unbiased source on feminist groups. http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Eric_S._Raymond#i_am_slowly_goi... Rational Wiki certainly has its own biases, but they call out a lot of problematic items with links right back to the blog posts if you care to verify.

I wasn't aware of that crankery, however, that does not discredit these straightforward allegations (argumentum ad hominem). I should add that this particular tactic is already being practiced on the bigwigs in the atheist community, so it's far from implausible.

The allegations have absolutely no evidence behind them. In that case of course one should take into account their source's general credibility, or lack thereof.

As for the atheist community, you will have to provide a source.

Re: Abuse is indefensible

#122

Post by marrs »

srpablo wrote: post #18
unfamiliar wrote: post #2

I've read a few of Linus' rants and been on the fence, but this one does seem to have crossed some sort of line into being unnecessarily abusive, and to add to that, unclear communication. The rewritten version really does emphasise a much better approach. Linus's rant doesn't read like it was written by... a stable person. I was in full agreement with the article up until this: >Of the many things I could say about…

> Completely irrelevant and not true in my opinion. Hardly, when talking about brash/abusive behavior in the context of an industry where women are underrepresented, I think it's plenty fine to mention that there might be a connection to be made. > the gender of the poster makes no difference Eh, I don't agree. It's well-observed in social sciences that men are given more leeway to be abusive than women are; one exam…

What does being abrasive or bossy have to do with abuse? These are character traits, and not necessarily bad ones.

Re: Abuse is indefensible

#123

Post by tptacek »

shepik wrote: post #13

To be honest, Linus' rants is making a better point for me. I really feel his pain with overflow_usub, and i feel nothing when reading rewritten version.

I'm surprised to read this, because I feel like I understand what Linus is ranting about, and while he's probably right, he's right about such a minor and easily disposed-with point that I'm surprised to see him invest so much emotion in it.

He could have just said "overflow_usub? no, not in 2015." and everyone would have agreed with him.

Re: Abuse is indefensible

#124

Post by delinka »

arguseyes wrote: post #101
delinka wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps you could elaborate on how this is even relevant.

Most people on this planet can deal with opinions just fine. Case in point: the recipient of Linus' message. It only ever seems to be an issue for those entitled, self-absorbed Title IX crybabies for whom every opinion they disagree with is "literally rape". :-)

So you've stereotyped over three hundred million people to be "self-absorbed Title IX crybabies for whom every opinion they disagree with is 'literally rape'."

I still don't see how this is relevant or contributes to the discussion.

Re: Abuse is indefensible

#125

Post by tptacek »

raverbashing wrote: post #34
adamc wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why on earth do I need to "feel his pain" rather than just understand the issues at hand?

Because them some people think it's still ok to go with the broken code That's cultural differences 101 As a simple example: in Canada one might say "please do not feed the animals" in a Zoo. In some other places, for the message to have the same effect it must be as such: "It is expressly forbidden to feed the animals! Those being caught doing so will be expelled from the zoo!"

Wait. "Broken" code?

Re: Abuse is indefensible

#126

Post by enneff »

marrs wrote: post #118

As I understand it, the Linux codebase has hundreds of regular contributors and Torvalds basically spends his entire time reviewing patches to an operating system kernel that is used in countless mission-critical scenarios across the world. The implications of introducing a bug or security exploit to an OS kernel could be as severe as loss of life. With that in mind, I find myself wondering every time I read a report…

> But if I choose to make a contribution to Linux, even a few years from now, I will remember what practices to avoid through my memories of this and previous rants.

This reads like fantastic satire.

Re: Abuse is indefensible

#127

Post by MacsHeadroom »

ZanyProgrammer wrote: post #19

Why is it that people who support Linus' tirades and mention freedom of speech, etc get so incredibly hurt when others exercise their own freedom of speech and point out how abusive they are?

>Why is it that people...get so incredibly hurt when others...point out how abusive they are?

Because they don't think it's abusive. If it isn't (I personally think it is), then pointing "out how abusive they are" comes off as passive aggressively saying they shouldn't express themselves in a certain way. That is effectively telling them they can not speak certain things that they feel are an important part of their ability to express certain ideas. It may as well be needless censorship, in their minds.

Clearly the best response would be to calmly explain why expressing themselves in that way is important. But they're on the defensive, and honestly think aggression is a good way to express themselves, so -in their minds- why should they be calm about it?

Re: Abuse is indefensible

#128

Post by nabla9 »

snomad wrote: post #94

I didn't find this rant abusive. Once worked for a law firm in a high stress industry - some of those lawyers were abusive, woah nelly. Also, have a brother who was in army, you can't even imagine the language of he and his friends. This is child's play and someone who ultimately cares about delivering a quality end product who was offended by someone taking away from that mission. And his point was right, the code w…

>I'm most curious on the age / background of those in this thread who do find it hurtful and offensive.

Me too. I feel that there is generational shift.

For me, abusive means that someone picks you as a permanent target and treats you badly consistently.

I'm completely fine with people calling me with names over some issues when it's clear that they are fighting against me over some specific issue. I'm allowed to use strong words as well. When the subjects changes, there is no hostility. That's how you know you are dealing with emotional person who is not abusing you.

Picking up text fragments and analyzing one email for triggers that can be labeled as "abusive" seems so weird. I guess I feel that there is difference between "abusive language" and abusive and others don't see it.

Re: Abuse is indefensible

#129

Post by lagadu »

gpvos wrote: post #90
x1024 wrote: post #11

Funny how the author "will moderate comments" and the only comments left are those who uncritically agree with them.

I see at least two comments that are critical of the author. And even if they were posted after you wrote this, how do you know he has deleted anything at all?

Because it's a very divisive issue. Obviously I cannot guarantee that he had posts submitted that are critical of him but I would be very surprised that a fairly high-profile post (high enough to be featured on HN) had anything but nearly universal acclaim, given how it tends to polarize crowds.

Re: Abuse is indefensible

#130

Post by spacecowboy_lon »

toyg wrote: post #88
spacecowboy_lon wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have noticed that Nordic non native English people often have very good spoken English but have a poor grasp of the unwritten rules concerning "engineering language"

It's not just Nordics. Non-native speakers tend to see swearwords as funny (aren't they the first thing one learns, after all? Even as a kid!), I'm guilty of that myself. For English in particular, this is reinforced by abundant film material: the cooler the movie, the highest the chance to have it packed with swearwords, because it makes it sexier for native-speakers. This results in non-natives (who will likely con…

Yes taking Malcolm Tucker as a guide to appropriate English usage is not a good idea.
Post reply on HN