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

No more rock stars: how to stop abuse in tech communities

hypatia.ca

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 148 posts

Re: No more rock stars: how to stop abuse in tech communities

#111

Post by tptacek »

klagermkii wrote: post #109
matthewmacleod wrote: post #6

There should be no abuse - sexual or otherwise - in tech communities. Please call it out whenever you see it, in a polite but firm manner, and don't be afraid or intimidated by it. The vast majority of people will support you, and it's important to do so not only for your own protection but for others that might not be so willing or able to do the same. That said, something about the tone of this blog post is utterly…

> That said, something about the tone of this blog post is utterly repellent to me and I'm struggling to put my finger on the reason why. I'm sure the authors of the article would recommend you read the linked piece on http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Tone_argument For me what sits a little uneasily is that a huge amount of this directly conflicts with the startup culture and stories of early tech, especially ones…

Nobody is saying that there isn't a place for that; the reason it seems like a live argument is that people are deliberately taking the least charitable interpretation of the post possible and then beating up on it.

Re: No more rock stars: how to stop abuse in tech communities

#112

Post by NetTechM »

peterwwillis wrote: post #88

First off, there is lots of different potential abuse in a tech community. Second, not all of it comes from "rock stars" - the aggregate cases of abuse probably greatly outweigh rockstardom-enabled abuse. Third, the abuse was perpetuated not because Jake was a "rock star", but because your community's values suck and nobody would stand up and call him out, AND nobody cared once they did. This was primarily a failure…

Well said.

Although I think it needs to be pointed out that sometimes, someone is a Rockstar because they earned it. Which seems to be a possibility left unexplored in this piece.

Re: No more rock stars: how to stop abuse in tech communities

#113

Post by protomyth »

Animats wrote: post #72
protomyth wrote: post #21

It seems like they are redefining rock star in the "A rock star likes to be the center of attention." paragraph. I am getting a little sick of the trend[1] of redefining a word to mean something else. Given this, a genuine complement of calling someone a "rock star" should probably be met with a hostility. The line "A rock star appears in dozens of magazine profiles – and never, ever tells the journalist to talk to t…

"A rock star likes to be the center of attention." That describes many CEOs and founders. The VC system today values the glib attention-seeker. So does Kickstarter, where the video of the presenter is often more important than the product. Society as a whole today rewards the attention-seeker. There was a time when self-promotion was considered an embarrassing lower-class trait, associated with door to door salesmen…

Ok and I partially agree, but I'm not arguing that point. I'm trying to figure out why someone is taking a commonly used term for someone with a high achievement level and turn it into crud. Why couldn't they have said "attention seeker" or "asshole"? Why does "rock star" need to be redefined as an insult?

Whatever I think about attention seekers[1], I am much more offended by this constant need we seem to have to tear down people who were heroes and with them the words we use to describe our heroes. This churn is bad for us. [edit: obviously anyone who actual did what was said needs to be more than torn down, but that doesn't mean the words need to be burnt]

1) and oh, boy howdy to I have some strong opinions on them including a rant that involves being lied to and almost getting killed by cattle.

Re: No more rock stars: how to stop abuse in tech communities

#114

Post by Canada »

tptacek wrote: post #57
ktRolster wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That said, something about the tone of this blog post is utterly repellent to me and I'm struggling to put my finger on the reason why. To me the dissonance came from an unusual definition of the word "rockstar." In the programming context, I've usually heard it as "someone who is really good at programming," but here they are trying to define it as "someone who pretends to be good at programming and harasses everyon…

This post is using "rock star" in a far more conventional sense than programmers do. To these authors, a "rock star" personality is someone who receives frequent media attention, who is given numerous slots to speak at conferences, and who cultivates an active fandom. It happens that most of these people don't do much real work, but "not doing real work" probably isn't as central to the definition as those other thin…

I believe the most popular label for that is "media whore"

Re: No more rock stars: how to stop abuse in tech communities

#115

Post by tptacek »

Canada wrote: post #114
tptacek wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This post is using "rock star" in a far more conventional sense than programmers do. To these authors, a "rock star" personality is someone who receives frequent media attention, who is given numerous slots to speak at conferences, and who cultivates an active fandom. It happens that most of these people don't do much real work, but "not doing real work" probably isn't as central to the definition as those other thin…

I believe the most popular label for that is "media whore"

That doesn't work either! There are rock star personalities in security who don't seek out media attention, but nonetheless cultivate fandoms and headline conferences.

A lot of people are also uncomfortable the the gendering implied in the word "whore". It's not worth litigating here (please let's not), but it's worth knowing about.

Re: No more rock stars: how to stop abuse in tech communities

#116

Post by serge2k »

lukeasrodgers wrote: post #67
super_id wrote: post #52

Stopped reading at the trigger warning. When did the whole internet become a joke from PCU?

Personally I find trigger warnings annoying sometimes as well, though I believe it is mostly for irrational reasons and so I don't let it stop me from reading anything preceded by a trigger warning. Even if you believe you have good reasons for being offended/annoyed by trigger warnings, it's unfortunate that this would cause you to dismiss the text/opinion out of hand. Perhaps we need trigger warning trigger warning…

> so I don't let it stop me from reading anything preceded by a trigger warning

I often do. It varies, this article is mostly fine. Some good points in general about organizations.

When you get to codes of conduct and changing the PRs to remove master/slave terminology you pretty much lose me. I guess a CoC is useful as it puts things in writing, but it still feels like PC overkill. If you aren't able to treat people with respect/professionalism then leave. Does it really need to be called out that you need to do that regardless of gender, race, sexual orientation, gender identity, etc...

To be quite frank, some of the things brought up just seem like they really aren't a big deal. Someone is harassing people then yes, absolutely go after them. Gender neutrality in your new press release, yeah sure that is sensible. Complaining because some database system uses master/slave terminology... does it really matter? Of course that goes both ways, something trivial can probably just be changed. Even if the only real reason is to get someone to quit complaining.

Re: No more rock stars: how to stop abuse in tech communities

#117

Post by Canada »

tptacek wrote: post #115
Canada wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe the most popular label for that is "media whore"

That doesn't work either! There are rock star personalities in security who don't seek out media attention, but nonetheless cultivate fandoms and headline conferences. A lot of people are also uncomfortable the the gendering implied in the word "whore". It's not worth litigating here (please let's not), but it's worth knowing about.

What makes a media whore is the desire for attention at any cost. It's toxic behavior, thus the pejorative term for it. I wasn't suggesting the article use it. The label doesn't fit any of the other undesirable behaviors they enumerated.

Re: No more rock stars: how to stop abuse in tech communities

#118

Post by tptacek »

Canada wrote: post #117
tptacek wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That doesn't work either! There are rock star personalities in security who don't seek out media attention, but nonetheless cultivate fandoms and headline conferences. A lot of people are also uncomfortable the the gendering implied in the word "whore". It's not worth litigating here (please let's not), but it's worth knowing about.

What makes a media whore is the desire for attention at any cost. It's toxic behavior, thus the pejorative term for it. I wasn't suggesting the article use it. The label doesn't fit any of the other undesirable behaviors they enumerated.

You want something past "attention whore", which connotes only aspiration and doesn't capture accumulated social capital. It's the accumulated social capital that makes these people so harmful.

Re: No more rock stars: how to stop abuse in tech communities

#119

Post by NetTechM »

prawn wrote: post #76
NetTechM wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So, perhaps that would explain the extreme jump from jerk to sexual deviant and the clear tone being taken in the opening. However great first hand experience is for ted talks, it is generally relegated to very low on the quantifiable scale for corporations and the business community in general.

If the author must ignore third-party reports and first-hand experience (including a witness), what's left? Many internal business investigations rely on exactly those things to make judgements that protect their work environment.

Who said they have to ignore third party reports?

I was simply saying that the aggregate would logically be a much larger number than any number of "rockstars" that happened to be caught in wrongdoing.

A bit like the focus on Mass shootings for gun related violence when the overwhelming majority of gun related deaths are suicide or lawful use.

Sensational and yet not indicative of the bigger issues.

If you mean using random Twitter posts as a "third party" obviously you haven't seen how many troll accounts are on Twitter... Reliable or even gasp confirmed third party sources would be preferable.

Re: No more rock stars: how to stop abuse in tech communities

#120

Post by NetTechM »

tptacek wrote: post #54
exstudent2 wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a separate issue from saying that rockstar syndrome leads to sexual abuse though. It's not really fair to use a boogieman like that to make the case against rockstar worship. If it's a bad idea, it can be argued against without the rhetorical leap made here.

One problem with rockstarism is that it can create safe havens for abusers. But there are all sorts of other concerns. I'm surprised to see people defending it here; HN has always struck me as a community that is pretty cynical about rock stars.

Cynical yes, but some people do really good work and just end up in the position because of it.

Too much painting with a broad brush and trying to redefine a word normally reserved for an Ace team member.

Post reply on HN