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

PyCon Code of Conduct changed to avoid public shaming

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 387 posts

Re: PyCon Code of Conduct changed to avoid public shaming

#291

Post by hhw »

imsofuture wrote: post #63
Sumaso wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was her public outing that caused this situation in the first place! Also, do you think if there wasn't as much drama going around that these men still would have been fired? There is much more to this situation then an employer finding out that one of their employees make a dongle joke at a conference, and decided that was grounds for them to be fired. It is much more likely that the employer doesn't want to be a…

If a man had posted that tweet, their firing would not have been notable and the internet would not be calling for boycotts, 'justice', apologies nor issuing death threats.

If a man had posted that tweet, likely nobody would have paid him any attention aside from maybe an eye roll from how easily offended he was, how he lacked a sense of humor (even if the joke wasn't very funny), and how he resorted to extreme passive aggressive tactics instead of simply saying STFU to the guy making the joke.

And if the tweet had still somehow garnered a lot of attention and gotten someone fired, he would have been condemned much more strongly for lacking the basic human decency not to out someone publicly, lacking the empathy to express regret over a man with a wife and three kids losing their job, and not manning up to admit they didn't handle the situation appropriately.

In other words, if a man had posted that tweet, he would have received much worse treatment, because this has everything to do with the tweet being an inappropriate reaction to a silly joke, and nothing to do with discrimination against women.

Re: PyCon Code of Conduct changed to avoid public shaming

#292

Post by rbanffy »

freehunter wrote: post #233
belorn wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know crackers have the same issue. They can't help not to look when people freely type their passwords in front of them during conferences. How can they not look memorize that password? And from there to use it or post it on twitter is just a small step right? Admins has the same problems. A co-worker ask them for help fixing their emails, and the content of those email are just there. How can they not see the conv…

People use POP email at work all the time. I can see their plaintext passwords coming through the network monitor (which it's my job to review), and I've seen some patently offensive passwords being used. This brings up two of your points: First, I ignore the fact that I can see their username and password. The responsible thing to do is to completely forget that you can see it. I have no business with their login in…

Shouldn't you advise them to use POP over SSL?

Re: PyCon Code of Conduct changed to avoid public shaming

#293

Post by rayiner »

dos1 wrote: post #27

One of the reasons I've taken an interest in this whole fiasco is that I occasionally make "colorful" jokes. Not dissimilar from the two guys at PyCon. I make every attempt to keep these jokes private between my friends and I, but I'm sure others have heard me make them. Some people might find them funny, others may be offended. It scares me to think that making an offhand penis joke could result in being publicly ou…

Fucking NorCal. Nobody in NYC would've blinked at that joke.

Relevant: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7FAI_-woNh4

Re: PyCon Code of Conduct changed to avoid public shaming

#294

Post by LockeWatts »

EvanKelly wrote: post #287
SeanDav wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just because you have good hearing and/or are incapable of focusing on something else does not make the conversation less private. A private conversation is one that is intended to occur only between the parties involved. Your being able to hear it or not is irrelevant if the intention and expectation was that the conversation is meant to be between specific parties. I understand this is not completely black and whit…

You also can't ignore the history and social dynamics of women at tech conferences. There's a sordid history of misogyny at these things. I remember just last year reading horrible accounts from either blackhat or defcon (can't remember which). I understand PyCon is almost certainly of a different breed, but the history can't be overlooked in this situation.

It was Defcon, but I can't see how what happened there is any way related to what happened here.

"People have treated women badly at tech conferences before, thus it's perfectly valid to overreact and ruin the career of a guy who did nothing wrong"

What?

Re: PyCon Code of Conduct changed to avoid public shaming

#295

Post by rdl »

I'm incredibly impressed by how PyCon has handled this whole thing (both their CoC and how they arbitrated it, and their success in attracting 20% women to a programming conference.) Compare it to e.g. the BSidesSF fiasco.

One of the awesome things about Python is that two of the best Python developers I know are female, along with maybe 20-30% of "good" programmers who program primarily in Python being female as well. It really seems like one of the more inclusive technical communities.

I wonder how much of that is due to the language itself, how much is how it's been used in academic programs, and how much is due to the people who were originally involved in the language, the conferences, etc.

Re: PyCon Code of Conduct changed to avoid public shaming

#296

Post by lucisferre »

dos1 wrote: post #27

One of the reasons I've taken an interest in this whole fiasco is that I occasionally make "colorful" jokes. Not dissimilar from the two guys at PyCon. I make every attempt to keep these jokes private between my friends and I, but I'm sure others have heard me make them. Some people might find them funny, others may be offended. It scares me to think that making an offhand penis joke could result in being publicly ou…

Whether you believe she was appropriate or not (I don't but that doesn't matter) the fact is conversations and actions made in public are not ever really "in private".

Re: PyCon Code of Conduct changed to avoid public shaming

#297

Post by kstrauser »

I just issued a pull request that would add test cases to the Code of Conduct. It's at https://github.com/kstrauser/pycon-code-of-conduct/commit/14... .

The idea is that:

1. It's good to define exactly what we want to happen in various test cases. Either we can get consensus ("yeah, that's how it should turn out!") or decide that there's no clear answer. Both results add valuable information to the process. 2. We have examples to compare the actual Code of Conduct against to decide whether it achieves the results we want.

I'm not directly related to PyCon in any way other than as a happy attendee. As of this moment, I have no support (official or otherwise) for this project. I just think it could be a useful tool and an interesting exercise. Please jump in if you agree!

PS: The syntax is awful. I'm keenly aware of that, but I'm not aware of other testing frameworks for English documents and I'm making it up as I go along.

Re: PyCon Code of Conduct changed to avoid public shaming

#298

Post by drharris »

RougeFemme wrote: post #252
drharris wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You seem to believe that offense is subjective to the individual. Should we then be responsible for everything we do that offends others? What level of recourse should they have for being offended? If we think that punitive action is appropriate given an offense, how do we determine what a legitimate offense is, versus a non-legitimate offense?

I don't see how offense could be anything but subjective to the individual, really. (Yes, I know there are things that are considered objective to the sub-group, but even within those sub-groups, there will be disagreement. That's clear from the various threads on this topic on HN.) The question many of us struggle with is where to draw that line between that "individual objection" and "free speech" - and how flexibl…

1600 Penn (great show, btw) had an episode where people picketed the White House for the environmental policies. Through a series of hijinks, these people got an audience with the President to express their concerns. Once in there, it becomes a cacophony as some argue for public transit, others argue to corporate responsibility, etc. They had some "thing" in common, but each had much different ideas about what really brought them there.

So, I find true your statement that even within subgroups, there is disagreement over an offense's legitimacy. Yet, we as flawed humans still seek objective punishment for others's offenses, even when we don't personally ascribe to claiming those offenses for ourselves. This to me is the most interesting part of all of this, that everybody has a ready-made opinion about what thing should happen to these people involved even though the original offense was 100% subjective. This brings up some interesting questions:

1) Can one really be offended by hearing a story about a subjective offense from someone else, and thus pass legitimate judgment? If so, what is the real offense - the original act, or merely what the act represents. 2) If the true offense is about what the act represents, then does passing judgment on the offensive party appropriately handle the situation? 3) If an offense is a subjective thing, then does it need to be personal, and directed toward the offendee in order to be legitimate?

Re: PyCon Code of Conduct changed to avoid public shaming

#299

Post by LockeWatts »

niggler wrote: post #230
SeanDav wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just because you have good hearing and/or are incapable of focusing on something else does not make the conversation less private. A private conversation is one that is intended to occur only between the parties involved. Your being able to hear it or not is irrelevant if the intention and expectation was that the conversation is meant to be between specific parties. I understand this is not completely black and whit…

"A private conversation is one that is intended to occur only between the parties involved." What are your thoughts on the Romney 47% remark? (that was recorded by a bartender at the event)

The ideas behind libel and slander laws apply here. The larger your public profile, the less protection you have from libel and slander.

Mr. Romney was saying politically relevant things at a politically relevant dinner while running for a political office. The recording was perfectly legal and I'd consider moral. The people have the right to know the truth about the politicians they're voting on.

Re: PyCon Code of Conduct changed to avoid public shaming

#300

Post by Torgo »

Cushman wrote: post #96
drharris wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You seem to believe that offense is subjective to the individual. Should we then be responsible for everything we do that offends others? What level of recourse should they have for being offended? If we think that punitive action is appropriate given an offense, how do we determine what a legitimate offense is, versus a non-legitimate offense?

> Should we then be responsible for everything we do that offends others? Yes. > What level of recourse should they have for being offended? If we think that punitive action is appropriate given an offense, how do we determine what a legitimate offense is, versus a non-legitimate offense? If people finding out publicly that you did it would cause you to lose your job, that might be a good indicator.

The Hollywood Blacklist was completely justified then, because employing (suspected) commies subjected your company to negative publicity. Alternately, firings can represent the witch hunt of the age (except when it is actual witch hunts and they are actually setting them on fire.)
Post reply on HN