Live data from Hacker News

The Developer Formerly Known as FreeBSDGirl

blog.randi.io

221–230 of 232 posts

Re: The Developer Formerly Known as FreeBSDGirl

#221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I never said that it "gave her the right" to do anything. I said that it did not negate the bad things that happened to her. I said that we should not ignore the very serious and legitimate issues she raises because she's gotten very angry at people. And here's the fundamental issue I see in all of these debates: the majority (here, young white males) tries to invalidate completely legitimate concerns because the per…

What exactly "did people do to her"? Vivek Wadhwa wrote a book that she didn't like and upon being "criticized" even offered a free copy of it, she declined and told him to go die in a fire. Anne Rice called attention to an article about this and she was declared a "bully" and a "harasser". Ted Neward never had any conversations with her when she asked for him to be "driven out of the industry" and Iris Classon plead…

The proof is in your hostile attitude toward her.

Her post is about how she felt profoundly unwelcome in the FreeBSD community. Your response is not a counter-argument to her feeling unwelcome. As far as I can tell, your response is, "Randi did bad things." That's a non-sequitur. It's not a response to her feelings of being made to feel unwelcome.

If you had a germane response, I am guessing it would be, "Randi should feel unwelcome, because she is not a good person." If that's your response, you're not actually disagreeing with her. She said she felt unwelcome, you're basically saying, "Good. Yes. That's a good result."

Re: The Developer Formerly Known as FreeBSDGirl

#222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What exactly "did people do to her"? Vivek Wadhwa wrote a book that she didn't like and upon being "criticized" even offered a free copy of it, she declined and told him to go die in a fire. Anne Rice called attention to an article about this and she was declared a "bully" and a "harasser". Ted Neward never had any conversations with her when she asked for him to be "driven out of the industry" and Iris Classon plead…

The proof is in your hostile attitude toward her. Her post is about how she felt profoundly unwelcome in the FreeBSD community. Your response is not a counter-argument to her feeling unwelcome. As far as I can tell, your response is, "Randi did bad things." That's a non-sequitur. It's not a response to her feelings of being made to feel unwelcome. If you had a germane response, I am guessing it would be, "Randi shoul…

Why would I respond to "her feelings" when the facts of the matter is that SHE actually attacked and insulted/harassed the person she portrays as an evil harasser, and not the other way around? My response is that her account of what happened is wholly inaccurate and tries to reverse victim and perpetrator e.g. DARVO or "Deny, Attack, and Reverse Victim and Offender"

Not to say that she hasn't provided any proof for many of the claims made.

How do "her feelings" in any way matter over the facts of the situation? This doesn't make sense, I can't discuss anything based on "other people's feelings".

Re: The Developer Formerly Known as FreeBSDGirl

#223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's rather telling that this "exposé" Blogpost doesn't link to anything actually incriminating and tries to call someone a "rape apologist with neonazi friends" based on supposedly who they might have talked to once on Twitter, since there are links to RooshV who doesn't seem to have anything to do with the entire matter or FreeBSD in any way, but no links to what the accused supposedly did wrong. The links…

I have zero problem with everything you've listed here that she's said and done. You link to these things like they are incriminating evidence; I just see someone pushing back against an onslaught on bullshit. Your first example is literally a bad amazon book review. Did you see what she said? > The author Vivek Wadhwa spends his time harassing women on twitter when they try to call him out on his approaches to femin…

"You link to these things like they are incriminating evidence; I just see someone pushing back against an onslaught on bullshit."

No. You are depersonalizing her actions as "pushing back" against some impersonal force. What she actually did was engage in sustained harassment, bullying, and blacklisting campaigns against specific individual human beings.

Re: The Developer Formerly Known as FreeBSDGirl

#224
post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"He means it. Literally." No, rooshv was dripping with sarcasm.

Some things you can be sarcastic about, legalizing rape is not one of them, period.

How about eating babies? What do you think about that?

Re: The Developer Formerly Known as FreeBSDGirl

#225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have zero problem with everything you've listed here that she's said and done. You link to these things like they are incriminating evidence; I just see someone pushing back against an onslaught on bullshit. Your first example is literally a bad amazon book review. Did you see what she said? > The author Vivek Wadhwa spends his time harassing women on twitter when they try to call him out on his approaches to femin…

"You link to these things like they are incriminating evidence; I just see someone pushing back against an onslaught on bullshit." No. You are depersonalizing her actions as "pushing back" against some impersonal force. What she actually did was engage in sustained harassment, bullying, and blacklisting campaigns against specific individual human beings.

That's an interesting, albeit distorted, perspective of the events that transpired.

Re: The Developer Formerly Known as FreeBSDGirl

#226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't get to have people punished simply because you feel unsafe. That's absurd. What if your post makes me feel unsafe? Peoples feelings are subjective, people are different, some people have a hair-trigger and others don't care, some people read a lot into words and other people take them at face value. The only reason this individual should have been punished by FreeBSD folks for this alleged harassment is if…

My impression of you: Being dehumanized, threatened with death, rape, is a totally subjective experience and vaguely defined, so we shouldn't stop those things. I offered my conditional support to you people, but now I'm revoking it because I want people to be able to dehumanize and threaten you and ultimately do not care what happens to anyone else. BTW, being picked on and trolling cis men poses the exact scenario…

...Why would you want anyone to feel threatened and dehumanized?

You do realize that many of your critics will point to statements like this and use them against you. So why make them?

Re: The Developer Formerly Known as FreeBSDGirl

#227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have zero problem with everything you've listed here that she's said and done. You link to these things like they are incriminating evidence; I just see someone pushing back against an onslaught on bullshit. Your first example is literally a bad amazon book review. Did you see what she said? > The author Vivek Wadhwa spends his time harassing women on twitter when they try to call him out on his approaches to femin…

"You link to these things like they are incriminating evidence; I just see someone pushing back against an onslaught on bullshit." No. You are depersonalizing her actions as "pushing back" against some impersonal force. What she actually did was engage in sustained harassment, bullying, and blacklisting campaigns against specific individual human beings.

I downvoted you by mistake, please accept my apologies.

Re: The Developer Formerly Known as FreeBSDGirl

#228

Wow, really disgusting to hear how FreeBSD core reacted to this. I've read through a lot of the source materials; she hasn't been perfect in every move; but that's she's been able to be so level headed and professional about it in the face of an onslaught of sexism, intimidation and smear campaigns is... nothing short of a miracle. I don't care about any argument of if she's ever committed, or if her code is any good…

Sounds like they're a bunch of dude-nerds who want to handle every problem as if it were a technical problem. Their "process" seems tantamount to separating the two sides and telling them to sit down and shut up.

That's a not-unreasonable policy when we're talking about a technical debate that becomes acrimonious It's a terrible policy when we're talking about threats or threatening behavior by one party against another.

My experience is that most dude-nerds are oblivious by default to those sorts of non-technical, purely human issues. It's made all the worse because their behavior is more-or-less indistinguishable from genuinely malicious behavior. From the perspective of the person being threatened, it doesn't make much practical difference whether they're doing it out of ineptitude or malice.

Re: The Developer Formerly Known as FreeBSDGirl

#230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This may be unpopular opinion, but the fact is that there is just a perspective that you cannot understand through anecdotes or research. The experience of being trans, queer, female, etc., today is not summed up by text. It is the adrenaline and vomit from death threats, it's falling behind at work because of harassment, I could go on and on. Safe places are a way to ensure that everyone at least can truly empathize…

Unquestionably, threats should absolutely be forbidden, and they are. Threatening another person is already a federal crime and anyone receiving threats online should report it to law enforcement so the person making those threats can be dealt with and so that person can't continue to terrorize other people online. We should feel secure for our lives. Indeed it's one of the inalienable rights defined in the Declarati…

It's a little after the fact, but there's a lot going on in here that I feel compelled to correct.

> anyone receiving threats online should report it to law enforcement so the person making those threats can be dealt with and so that person can't continue to terrorize other people online.

I can see how you'd think that's a good response, but calling the cops isn't a no brainer for minorities, indeed crimes against minorities are drastically underreported. There's some good information in this thread about why (freebsdgirl's reply, for instance), but there are other reasons. Dealing with law enforcement can make a problem much, much worse; google around for the experiences that victims of sexual assault have when dealing with police and the courts. Reporting crimes like this can also get you blacklisted as an "HR problem". Victims sometimes blame themselves. Reporting a crime is a huge time and money sink. Statements, testimony, attorney's fees... it all piles up (and don't forget about the wage gap!). Again I'm only scratching the surface, but there are fundamental problems with the criminal justice system that need to be resolved before "just call the cops" is an adequate recourse.

> What many people now know as safe places, however, overreach their stated goal of providing security for minorities.

But what I think you mean is that you think it's too easy to experience disproportionate consequences for violating a safe space, for example Brendan Eich was forced to resign after his donations to an anti-same-sex-marriage campaign came to light. I'm guessing you feel like that was unjust: Eich was exercising his right to free speech, and he lost his job (one could argue it was more than just a job for him).

It's not unjust. Besides the fact that everyone who pressured Eich to step down was exercising their own free speech (blog posts, board resignations, public opinion campaigns, browser boycotts), all opinions are not valid political views, and not all political views are equal or even acceptable. For example, some people believe that all first-born children should be male, and all female fetuses should be aborted until a male child is born. If any CEO donated to a campaign supporting this cause, they'd likely lose their position, as it's pretty reprehensible.

Being racist, or homophobic, or transphobic, or misogynistic, or bigoted in general, is also reprehensible. It always has been. The friction here is that these attitudes are deeply entrenched in our culture; it takes time to clean them up, and people who are slow to change their attitudes are experiencing serious consequences for things that used to be completely acceptable (yet, importantly, still reprehensible). Victims of these attitudes rightly have no patience with this effort: their whole lives they've been oppressed for who they are, and their oppressors hide behind "free speech", and "well that's just my opinion" while minorities labor under the disparate impact caused by large numbers of relatively powerful people holding these beliefs. For example, 40% of managers admit to avoiding hiring women of childbearing age because they might use maternity benefits. That creates a bias against women that goes far beyond free speech and opinion.

The state constantly has to balance everyone's rights. There are tons of examples: free speech vs. harassment; freedom of religion vs. freedom from religion; liberty vs. safety (you have to get a license to own a gun or drive a car, etc.). You're arguing that, along the free speech vs. harassment continuum, safe spaces go too far to protect minorities from harassment, balancing the right to be bigoted against the right to feel safe and not be discriminated or prejudiced against. You need to take a closer look at the current state of things, because we're far, far away from "overreach" on this issue. Minorities continue to experience wildly disproportionate levels of harassment, physical violence and injustice. Over 80% of sexual harassment claims are made by women. African-American men are far overrepresented in our prisons. The wage gap between white men and white women, men of color and women of color is real. LGBT people face the threat of violence and discrimination every day.

> If you force someoen to empathize, they aren't truly empathizing, they are remaining quiet for fear of being called a bigot and getting their reputation ruined.

If someone does not empathize with the minority experience in the US, they're either ignorant or a bigot. You can dislike the facts, but you can't disagree with them.

Post reply on HN