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

Public Apology to Jeremy Howard

numfocus.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 288 posts

Re: Public Apology to Jeremy Howard

#131

Post by marcinzm »

harlanji wrote: post #113
smeeth wrote: post #45

Ok, I'm not heavily steeped in this, but at first glance this seems like total bullshit. Note that the original complaint was both 1) that the code of conduct people were being, well, total assholes, and 2) that the complaints were so obviously ridiculous that the entire exercise seemed like it could only be a power trip for those involved. The apology addressed neither. They apologized for being unclear about what s…

At very least the action is something to point to, and maintain reputation. Almost 5 years ago a hostile employer did this to me and since then most of my huge former network built over 15+ years have stopped associating with me and are starting to assume I’m mentally ill and hung up on it, but in truth I simply can’t work anymore due to the reference check process having been compromised and former associates lackin…

Except their apology doesn't do what you're saying as it doesn't say he was innocent or that he didn't violate the CoC. It simply says they didn't fully follow their process and that if he wants to appeal the board will hear it. As I read it he is still considered guilty unless the board accepts the appeal.

edit: And since he seems too emotionally exhausted by this to deal with it further there will possibly be no appeal filed and thus he will stay guilty by default.

Re: Public Apology to Jeremy Howard

#132

Post by omginternets »

eznzt wrote: post #30

Just the fact they have a group called "Diversity & Inclusion" is enough to steer away from these people. https://numfocus.org/category/diversity-inclusion-disc

I suspect you're being downvoted because people are misreading your tone, but I agree with the overall sentiment: D&I is often (though not always) coded language for "critical-theory ideology". I'm likewise suspicious of organizations that reify this in a particular board or department, especially when the company culture seems to be very procedural, bureaucratic and/or CYA. When it comes to weeding out *ism, these groups have a tendency to care only about hit-rate with little or no regard for false alarms. In extreme cases, they view any disagreement with their principles and practices as an affront in and of itself -- one that calls for punishment.

Edit: I don't really think the parent comment needed to be flagged ...

Re: Public Apology to Jeremy Howard

#133

Post by Veen »

notJim wrote: post #86
marcinzm wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As this whole debacles shows codifying doesn't remove arbitrary standards. Human social interactions are far too complex to codify in a concise way without massive edge cases. So all too often it just gives people a tool with which to better force their own arbitrary standards onto others.

As this blog post [1] lays out, this seems like a case where the CoC was poorly authored exactly for this reason. But this isn't a reason to not have a CoC, it just means this particular one was not done well. [1]: https://www.fast.ai/2020/10/28/code-of-conduct/

There is no way to author a set of rules such that it can't be abused by someone with the power to enforce it. That's why the law has judges, juries, courts of appeal, standards of evidence, disclosure rules, corpus delicti, habeas corpus, and so on.

The problem is not the CoC, but the lack of accountability, oversight, and transparency in enforcement.

Re: Public Apology to Jeremy Howard

#134

Post by g42gregory »

This apology rings hollow to me. A person of Jeremy Howard's statue was able to raise the issue in the media and get it resolved.

I would like to understand what would happen to a person who is not of a Jeremy Howard's statue and does not have such a access to the public discourse?

Re: Public Apology to Jeremy Howard

#135

Post by rmrfstar »

sigmaprimus wrote: post #100
smeeth wrote: post #45

Ok, I'm not heavily steeped in this, but at first glance this seems like total bullshit. Note that the original complaint was both 1) that the code of conduct people were being, well, total assholes, and 2) that the complaints were so obviously ridiculous that the entire exercise seemed like it could only be a power trip for those involved. The apology addressed neither. They apologized for being unclear about what s…

Just curious, what would You suggest as a remedy to this situation? This is an honest questions please don't get offended.

Honestly? They should be assigned 12 hours of reading that covers the history of due process, what it is, and why we have it.

Re: Public Apology to Jeremy Howard

#136

Post by GiorgioG »

geofft wrote: post #116
robjan wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can observe whether sshd is running a privileged process because you have all of the information available to make that judgement. You can't observe whether a random person is privileged because it's relative and related to your opinion and biases.

True, but then it's at most a false claim. It's still not an attack. If I say ping is privileged and you say you're on a distro with unprivileged ping, I haven't in any way denounced ping.

> it's at most a false claim

In your opinion. As the recipient of said 'claim' I took it as an attack. Maybe I'm an overly sensitive person, maybe it's the end of a long week and I'm just feeling cranky, either way it offended me. So in this fictional world I feel that I have been attacked, and the HN CoC frowns upon members hurting other members' feelings. What should be done?

Re: Public Apology to Jeremy Howard

#137

Post by marcinzm »

Am I reading this correctly?

It seems to say that Jeremy is still considered guilty of a CoC violation but if he appeals then the board will hear it (rather than the committee). So Jeremey has to file an appeal or the decision will stand? So the onus to fix this is on Jeremy who seems so exhausted by this whole process that he's quit conference talks?

That seems a response that lacks any sense of empathy to Jeremy.

edit: Okay. On Twitter they said that no judgement was made even now. However their enforcement policy (which the apology explicitly references) only mentions appeal if an action was already decided upon "Give them a place to appeal to if there is one, but in the meantime the action stands." Given that not adhering to their own process and written documents was a chief complaint it seems they haven't learned much yet from the incident.

Re: Public Apology to Jeremy Howard

#138

Post by sigmaprimus »

xab31 wrote: post #94
SommaRaikkonen wrote: post #5

The context for those out of the loop: https://www.fast.ai/2020/10/28/code-of-conduct/

It was a very effective response from Jeremy. He clearly describes his side of the story and convincingly explains why he thought he did nothing wrong. What is a little more troubling is that he (A) describes codes of conduct in detail and repeatedly affirms his allegiance to the general idea behind CoCs, including describing "previous sexual assault allegations" as "behaviors" he "strongly agrees" should be stopped.…

>>>", because he now has a "previous CoC violation allegation" on his permanent record, regardless of his acquittal."

I wonder how much this has affected his lifetime earning potential?

Couple that with the "public apology" seems like an open and shut lawsuit that many lawyers would be happy to take on contingency.

Re: Public Apology to Jeremy Howard

#139

Post by Spinnaker_ »

This all reminds me of a talk Justice Scalia once gave. The gist was that the US Constitution isn't very good compared to a lot of countries' equivalent document. For example, the Soviet's Bill of Rights was undoubtedly better.

The important issue is how you structure the governing bodies and separate powers. If you don't do this correctly then your Constitution, or bill of rights, or Code of Conduct, is worthless.

I don't think the tech community has figured out this second part.

Re: Public Apology to Jeremy Howard

#140

Post by kurbin »

pelario wrote: post #70
kurbin wrote: post #35

They say "Because of the missteps of this committee, we have asked the NumFOCUS Board of Directors to take over the work of the committee", yet the 7-person board of directors overlaps with the 4-person code of conduct committee. Board of Directors: https://numfocus.org/community/people CoC Committee: https://numfocus.org/code-of-conduct#persons-responsible

C'mon, overlap n = 1

The only two non-staffers (and thus decisionmakers) on the committee were both on the board at some point.
Post reply on HN