[deleted]
Crockford
11–20 of 117 posts
Re: Crockford
#12He said a few things that feel like promoting a non inclusive environment. Which is bad, especially from someone like him, because many people look up to him and probably think it is okay to say such things. Edit: Also interesting that the HN crowd always confirms the accusations they receive.
So to be inclusive they excluded him for a few very mild but borderline comments he made that have been taken out of context. Could have been worse I guess - he could have used a gendered pronoun!
Re: Crockford
#13Political correctness stifles upward mobility and promotes the maintenance of the current 'status quo'.
We're trending towards a future where people can do anything they want as long as they have enough power and don't say anything offensive while doing it.
It's horse shit to be honest; most humans don't really give a fuck about a gendered presentation slide and removing all gender references from everything isn't how you magically gain 'equality'.
Some of the worst humans I know are the ones who love this garbage because it's essentially the current way to bully and silence the people you don't like.
Re: Crockford
#14Mr. Straw is part of the problem, imo. There's a lawful vs chaotic dichotomy going on - Mr. Straw started out lawful conservative, but then found out about a different set of laws he could leverage into a position of power. It's a similar but different power leverage being exercised elsewhere by a new generation. Feeling excluded by more usual measures like achievement or talent, they've taken to using social taboos…
Or it could be that he changed his opinions based on new perspectives like any intellectually honest person does.
Re: Crockford
#15Given the context, chicharrones was clearly a mistake or a play on the word cojones. The earnest parsers of speech for fatal psychological landmines would not in a million years be able to make this tiny mental leap, as it requires a sense of humor.
Re: Crockford
#16He said a few things that feel like promoting a non inclusive environment. Which is bad, especially from someone like him, because many people look up to him and probably think it is okay to say such things. Edit: Also interesting that the HN crowd always confirms the accusations they receive.
monads sound like gonads, its elementary humor but there's nothing offensive about it. If assholes were only attached to men, some dumb fuck would complain if he made fart jokes.
Re: Crockford
#17There's the old idea of "you judge your actions by your intentions and others intentions by their actions."
I think culturally we've entered into this weird area where we're not even judging people so much by their actions but rather by how their actions make some people feel. There is nothing wrong with being mindful of how your statements and actions are perceived. Communication is always a two-way street where what is heard is sometimes more important than what is said. It's just too bad that we're shifting so far away from being able to understand the intentions of the speaker. Fear of saying the wrong thing never teaches someone why and what is wrong to say.
Re: Crockford
#18Crockford did nothing wrong. Fuck Nodevember. If you have huevos or egos or whatever, don't support that conference. He is one of those guys that will email you back if you have a technical question. I know because he already did twice to me. Who can say that about someone so influential?
It's another conference scam anyway. They're charging $350 for tickets with unconfirmed speakers and they have an open call for speakers.
Considering the main value is out of the speakers selling before having much of anything confirmed or even finished just screams like yet another conference trying to cash in (they're even taking sponsors, too).
I don't mind conferences where you have to pay mind you but I've only seen the small, borderline scammy conferences where you have to pay before finding out the full line up of speakers.
Re: Crockford
#19This is a perfect synopsis. Trump is a complete spazz but a symptom of the backlash. I agree.
Re: Crockford
#20I'm trying to imagine an alternative timeline in which Nodevember, after having announced Crockford as a speaker and then receiving pushback on Twitter, privately discusses things with Crockford and mutually agree that they should part ways, but come up with a plausible explanation that would minimize the loss of face for both parties. (for the sake of argument, let's say we agree that conferences have the unilateral…
"it seriously fucked up for not vetting Mr. Crockford before inviting him"
What exactly does Mr. Crockford need to be "vetted" for, with whom, and how exactly did those people gain the authority to decide who gets to speak and who doesn't?