Collaboration not Derision in the Node Community • Hacker News Board

Re: Collaboration not Derision in the Node Community

#71

Post by GrinningFool » Sun, Dec 01, 2013, 5:43 AM UTC

itafroma wrote: post #41

StavrosK wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When did Ben say pronouns should be gendered? I saw nothing on GitHub like that, yet the Joyent post mentions it more than once.

I couldn't find any explicit statement by Noordhuis that could be characterized as what Cantrill called an "insistence that pronouns should in fact be gendered". I took that to be something Cantrill thought was implied by the revert. However, there's a deleted GitHub comment from Noordhuis that nevertheless still appears on his public activity stream[1]. I starts with: > For the record, I reverted the merge in 804d40…

Seems not: https://github.com/joyent/libuv/commit/804d40ee14dc0f82c482d...

Ultimately, it looks like Ben was fairly impartial about the whole thing - he didn't accept it because it wasn't a significant enough change to merit accepting. He tried to revert the acceptance because the acceptance had been done without approval.

Re: Collaboration not Derision in the Node Community

#72

Post by aroman » Sun, Dec 01, 2013, 5:46 AM UTC

ispivey wrote: post #65

aroman wrote: post #51

I'm sorry, but the entire notion that using masculine pronouns somehow implies sexism is complete bullshit. That's how the English language works. "He" is used as both neuter and masculine. There is no "it" pronoun. Please, for the love of all that is holy, stop fighting about this. Unless someone actually did something sexist, this is a linguistic bikeshed to end all bikesheds. Childish community behavior aside, the…

There's a bunch of research suggesting that using "he" as a neuter pronoun makes women feel excluded: - First experiment/study I found: http://scholarworks.umass.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=12... - Links to more research on the subject: http://alyx.io/educational-resources/gender.html#generic-mas... Douglas Hofstadter wrote a good piece of satire explaining why it's oppressive by s/man/white, etc: http://www.cs.v…

Thanks for all those links — I wasn't aware of those studies (especially not about the deliberate effort to force the singular "they" out of use) and I think they have definitely influenced my conscious personal writing style (I do tend to avoid gendered pronouns anyway).

I will agree that I was on the wrong side of this in the sense that "he" is more or equally preferable to "they", but I made another point too — that this entire topic is a giant bikeshed.

You say "people should certainly stop fighting", but do you then imply that fighting for "they" is justified? Personally, I don't think it is.

Re: Collaboration not Derision in the Node Community

#73

Post by eliteraspberrie » Sun, Dec 01, 2013, 5:46 AM UTC

Way to throw your people under the bus. I wouldn't work for a company like this -- not to mention Joyent, after that bit of libel they call a blog post.

Re: Collaboration not Derision in the Node Community

#74

Post by quinnchr » Sun, Dec 01, 2013, 5:58 AM UTC

aroman wrote: post #68

quinnchr wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah for sure the english language couldn't possibly itself be influenced by sexism. That's just how it works. We should just accept it. The pronoun itself isn't sexist it's the reason behind it's use. Beyond indicating (possible) differences in biological sex, what purpose does using a gendered pronoun serve? It doesn't add information, it merely reinforces gender norms. http://www.english.wisc.edu/rfyoung/336/gende…

Thanks for your reply. > Yeah for sure the english language couldn't possibly itself be influenced by sexism. That's just how it works. We should just accept it. That was not my point, nor do I believe I implied that. I acknowledge that the original reason why English's nonspecific/neuter pronoun is the same as the masculine is almost certainly because of ages-old sexism and masculo-normativity. > The pronoun itself…

It's an example of gender bias. By using exclusively he, there is an implicit assumption that whoever reading the doc block is a man, reinforcing the gender norm of programming being male dominated. I would say that falls under sexism.

I don't think sexism was intended, but that doesn't mean it can't be sexist. I'll be the first to admit it, I say sexist shit all the time, most of the time it's unintended. Fact of the matter is I'm constantly surrounded by sexism, I was raised on it, and it is what was taught to me. Even though I make a conscious effort to think outside the perspective of what I was taught, it's impossible not to internalize the sexism all around me.

Re: Collaboration not Derision in the Node Community

#75

Post by Lazare » Sun, Dec 01, 2013, 6:03 AM UTC

CyruzDraxs wrote: post #61

Lazare wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow, Joyent comes across very poorly. For the record, I support using gender-neutral pronouns; I actually support the original pull request. But it seems inarguable that: 1. It's a minor change 2. Node.js, like many projects, rejects minor changes 3. It was rejected for being a minor change 4. Joyent reacted amazingly unprofessionally In particular, I have concerns both with the way the initial decision was reversed…

The contributor also had not signed a CLA, and the commit message did not follow the guidelines. Ben should have been more explicit in his initial post about his reason for denying the commit. Isaac shouldn't have merged the pull, which violated the guidelines. The community shouldn't have raised their pitchforks without first seeking an explanation. Everyone involved could use a dose of professionalism.

God yes. It feels like everyone involved went out of their way to make things worse at every step.

An invalid but well-meaning pull request? Better give it a cryptic rejection. A rejected by politically sensitive pull request? Better pull rank and force its acceptance in violation of project guidelines. Main project backers violating project guidelines? Better reverse their commits with a passive aggressive commit message. Project lead reversing commits? Better post a vitriolic blog post about how he is a terrible asshole who should be fired!

Would it have been that hard to bounce a couple of emails back and forth, and sort it all out in private? Christ.

(Add good point about the CLA. Although needing a CLA to change a pronoun in the docs seems silly, I think it highlights that a pull request was the wrong tool for this.)

Re: Collaboration not Derision in the Node Community

#76

Post by CyruzDraxs » Sun, Dec 01, 2013, 6:04 AM UTC

aroman wrote: post #51

I'm sorry, but the entire notion that using masculine pronouns somehow implies sexism is complete bullshit. That's how the English language works. "He" is used as both neuter and masculine. There is no "it" pronoun. Please, for the love of all that is holy, stop fighting about this. Unless someone actually did something sexist, this is a linguistic bikeshed to end all bikesheds. Childish community behavior aside, the…

More importantly, a quarter of the world speaks grammatically-gendered languages. Many languages have no concept of gender-neutral pronouns.

Re: Collaboration not Derision in the Node Community

#77

Post by kmeluna » Sun, Dec 01, 2013, 6:04 AM UTC

From the blog post:

> If Ben can’t learn, we’ll fire him.

Reforming the use of English pronouns has nothing to do with the employee's professional activities.

No one should be threatened for either supporting or not supporting a political cause or brand of activism.

There is no consensus in society about how pronouns should be used or their cultural significance [1]. No one should have their livelihood threatened for either agreeing or not agreeing with one position or another or not having an opinion on the topic, or applying their professional, technical judgement.

Without commenting on the details of the kerfuffle, from a broader perspective, the workplace should not be a place for political coercion.

One editorial recently suggested that:

"[E]mployers coercing employees to express their employers’ political views is “the most undercovered story of the year.” [2]

"Already, American employers are increasingly using the captive audience technique to force their employees to learn about the employer’s political and religious views. During these sessions, employees may be forced, at the risk of losing their jobs, to listen to their employer’s perspective on the latest political and religious issues of the day." [3]

[1] http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/26/magazine/26FOB-onlanguage-...

[2] http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/political-animal-a/2012_12/...

[3] http://yalelawjournal.org/the-yale-law-journal-pocket-part/v...

[4] Efforts to keep politics out of the workplace: http://votesmart.org/bill/1711/

Re: Collaboration not Derision in the Node Community

#78

Post by Lazare » Sun, Dec 01, 2013, 6:08 AM UTC

GrinningFool wrote: post #71

itafroma wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I couldn't find any explicit statement by Noordhuis that could be characterized as what Cantrill called an "insistence that pronouns should in fact be gendered". I took that to be something Cantrill thought was implied by the revert. However, there's a deleted GitHub comment from Noordhuis that nevertheless still appears on his public activity stream[1]. I starts with: > For the record, I reverted the merge in 804d40…

Seems not: https://github.com/joyent/libuv/commit/804d40ee14dc0f82c482d... Ultimately, it looks like Ben was fairly impartial about the whole thing - he didn't accept it because it wasn't a significant enough change to merit accepting. He tried to revert the acceptance because the acceptance had been done without approval.

Technically, he was in the right.

Politically, reverting Isaac's commit (and especially doing so with a passive aggressive "Isaac, consider yourself chided." commit message) was clearly a mistake.

Re: Collaboration not Derision in the Node Community

#79

Post by CyruzDraxs » Sun, Dec 01, 2013, 6:09 AM UTC

Lazare wrote: post #75

CyruzDraxs wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The contributor also had not signed a CLA, and the commit message did not follow the guidelines. Ben should have been more explicit in his initial post about his reason for denying the commit. Isaac shouldn't have merged the pull, which violated the guidelines. The community shouldn't have raised their pitchforks without first seeking an explanation. Everyone involved could use a dose of professionalism.

God yes. It feels like everyone involved went out of their way to make things worse at every step. An invalid but well-meaning pull request? Better give it a cryptic rejection. A rejected by politically sensitive pull request? Better pull rank and force its acceptance in violation of project guidelines. Main project backers violating project guidelines? Better reverse their commits with a passive aggressive commit me…

A signed CLA may seem silly, but there were changes in code comments. That makes code ownership ambiguous, and the law doesn't tend to play nice with ambiguity.

Re: Collaboration not Derision in the Node Community

#80

Post by hacker789 » Sun, Dec 01, 2013, 6:12 AM UTC

ispivey wrote: post #65

aroman wrote: post #51

I'm sorry, but the entire notion that using masculine pronouns somehow implies sexism is complete bullshit. That's how the English language works. "He" is used as both neuter and masculine. There is no "it" pronoun. Please, for the love of all that is holy, stop fighting about this. Unless someone actually did something sexist, this is a linguistic bikeshed to end all bikesheds. Childish community behavior aside, the…

There's a bunch of research suggesting that using "he" as a neuter pronoun makes women feel excluded: - First experiment/study I found: http://scholarworks.umass.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=12... - Links to more research on the subject: http://alyx.io/educational-resources/gender.html#generic-mas... Douglas Hofstadter wrote a good piece of satire explaining why it's oppressive by s/man/white, etc: http://www.cs.v…

I use gender-neutral pronouns unless context dictates otherwise, but I want you to consider something.

If a policy (or lack thereof) is correlated with women feeling excluded or intimidated, it doesn't necessarily mean that the policy (or lack thereof) is a bad thing.

If women tend to feel intimidated by eye contact with men with whom they are in competition, it doesn't mean such eye contact should be banned. If women tend to feel feel excluded if the founding members of an organization or club are all men, it doesn't mean men should be forced to find a woman before founding an organization or club.