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

I Violated a Code of Conduct

fast.ai

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

951–960 of 971 posts

Re: I Violated a Code of Conduct

#951

Post by blooalien »

donatj wrote: post #163
friendlybus wrote: post #28

Using CoC's to backstab people is not going to end well. Using CoC's to institute a heirarchy of 'who can criticize who' is going to be rebelled against. Some people are power hungry and use words to get power. They are exposing themselves in the silliest ways. Pure vanity.

It’s been my general experience that this is why largely what CoC's end up actually being used for. Arbitrarily enforced and wielded as a weapon.

Exactly this. It's abuse (both of people, and of "the system"), pure and simple. This is exactly why each passing day brings me a little bit more hatred of this entire "SJW" mentality and the people who support it. Can't go even one full day anymore without seeing some instance in the news of someone abusing these exact sorta "rules" to straight-up harass people. It's just the latest form of socially acceptable bullying is all it is...

Re: I Violated a Code of Conduct

#952

Post by gwbas1c »

baobabKoodaa wrote: post #597
pindab0ter wrote: post #387

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This discussion is about someone being punished by a committee for something that wasn’t in the CoC, as you can read in the article.

No true scotsman.

I was personally bothered by this response.

Maybe it's worth looking at this comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24945750

Re: I Violated a Code of Conduct

#953

Post by jawarner »

baobabKoodaa wrote: post #944
jawarner wrote: post #939

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Yes, you are speculating that pindab0ter would think the enforcement action was related to the CoC That's not what I said. You seem to be focused on detailed differences in meaning but missing the thrust of these arguments. You claimed Scotsman fallacy to a perceived specific meaning of the sentence, but it didn't fit in context. In general you seem to be not aware of the contextual meaning of what anybody has said…

> > Yes, you are speculating that pindab0ter would think the enforcement action was related to the CoC > That's not what I said. Yes it is, you literally just said "I think pindab0ter would agree that it was improper enforcement of the CoC". See, you said "enforcement of the CoC". As in, CoC was the thing that was being enforced. Now you're trying to claim that "enforcement" was not related to "the CoC" in that sente…

> See, you said "enforcement of the CoC".

I said "improper enforcement of the CoC". As an example, "improper enforcement of the law" might suggest that something was enforced which wasn't the law. Is there a reason you're set on this interpretation of my words?

In this, and the Scotsman case, you seem to have chosen an interpretation fits your argument. I'm not sure this is a good way to carry on a conversation, though. This whole discussion was about whether pindab0ter made a valid point. It's not clear to me you are interested in understanding the point made. Maybe it's easier for you to label it as a fallacy. I know that's something I do frequently when I don't understand something -- assume it's incorrect.

Re: I Violated a Code of Conduct

#954

Post by spacekitcat »

btilly wrote: post #949
spacekitcat wrote: post #943

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Maya Forstater case isn't as you presented it. Why did you misrepresent it? Was it an innocent mistake or was it deliberate? She got sacked for a sustained campaign of harassment. If you don't believe me (and it would therefore be an innocent mistake), you can read the court ruling here: https://drive.google.com/file/d/12P9zf82TicPs2cCxlTnm0TrNFDD... If you've misrepresented this one, why would I trust any of you…

I was doing a quick search and believed someone else's representation of the case. But let's look at the case. A woman in question has a reasonably common belief that offends you and I think is not in accord with the facts. She is open about her belief, but also has apparently made an attempt to be polite in personal interactions with others. (See paragraph 41 for example.) Despite the ruling coming down against her,…

They clearly weren’t sacked for their opinions, but for creating a hostile work environment.

The free speech argument is a cop out frankly, and a lazy one at that.

Re: I Violated a Code of Conduct

#955

Post by [deleted] »

newscracker wrote: post #184

After reading the entire post, I feel really bad for him, and I hope he gets the time off and the support necessary to recover from this incident. I also feel quite angry with how he has been treated. So please let me vent it out here as politely as I’m able to. I can imagine something like this or worse happening on social media groups, but an ostentatious “committee” that listens only to one side and never gives th…

[deleted]

Re: I Violated a Code of Conduct

#958

Post by giardini »

freeone3000 wrote: post #262
giardini wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is what lawsuits are for. A few good lawsuit victories would put an end to this.

On what grounds?

Anything! That's what's great about lawsuits! Defamation of character, violation of contract, overreach, etc.

Ask a lawyer for a legal answer.

Re: I Violated a Code of Conduct

#959

Post by baobabKoodaa »

jawarner wrote: post #953
baobabKoodaa wrote: post #944

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> > Yes, you are speculating that pindab0ter would think the enforcement action was related to the CoC > That's not what I said. Yes it is, you literally just said "I think pindab0ter would agree that it was improper enforcement of the CoC". See, you said "enforcement of the CoC". As in, CoC was the thing that was being enforced. Now you're trying to claim that "enforcement" was not related to "the CoC" in that sente…

> See, you said "enforcement of the CoC". I said "improper enforcement of the CoC". As an example, "improper enforcement of the law" might suggest that something was enforced which wasn't the law. Is there a reason you're set on this interpretation of my words? In this, and the Scotsman case, you seem to have chosen an interpretation fits your argument. I'm not sure this is a good way to carry on a conversation, thou…

> As an example, "improper enforcement of the law" might suggest that something was enforced which wasn't the law.

No, you can't keep making up new meanings for words. "Enforcement of the law" means that law was being enforced. When you add "improper" in the front of it, it means that law was being enforced improperly. For example, when a police officer harasses a person on the pretext of enforcing the law, that would be improper law enforcement.

> This whole discussion was about whether pindab0ter made a valid point. It's not clear to me you are interested in understanding the point made. Maybe it's easier for you to label it as a fallacy.

If pindab0ter wants to come here to clarify that they actually meant that OP is a valid example of enforcing a CoC, I will take their word for it. Otherwise, I'm not going to entertain "hidden meanings" for the words that they already spoke, I'm going to assume that they meant what they said.

Re: I Violated a Code of Conduct

#960

Post by baobabKoodaa »

gwbas1c wrote: post #952
baobabKoodaa wrote: post #597

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No true scotsman.

I was personally bothered by this response. Maybe it's worth looking at this comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24945750

May I ask why were you bothered by it?
Post reply on HN