171–180 of 572 posts
Github has really completed an unusual feat - Hostile to people of color, the entire gender spectrum as well as cisgendered people of no color. All seem to have grievances with this company. Wow.
The main thing I've taken away from the whole github situation is that, as a tech company, you should just entirely stay away from public involvement in the social justice sphere. That doesn't mean exclusively hiring white men and sending out Kalanick-style emails; it means keeping your work environment as professional and politically neutral as possible unless absolutely necessary. My employer does a good job of thi…
The main takeaway should be a company has one obligation to you: a job to do and money to be paid. You as an adult bring your services to fix the problem in exchange for said compensation. Personal tesponbility is everything and Im glad she was fired. Individuals like her should be fired and removed from any workplace where they act as a menace to their coworkers.
A better way to put what I wrote is this: these problems can all be avoided by approaching problems from a professionalism point of view, rather than a social justice one. Both Coraline and her coworkers did unprofessional things that could have been avoided with better communication, and perhaps more attentive management.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
She went on a tirade against an Opal contributor a couple years back: https://github.com/opal/opal/issues/941
A "tirade"? I read her statements in that thread. I'd say they were very measured.
> Protip: you won't because you can't.Earlier quoted context omitted.
The maintainers instant reply was super flippant and worthy of retort. Never really wanted to use opal before, but if this is who is behind it...
Wow. That particular maintainer is really off the deep end - here is their writeup on the incident (which is pretty fucked up reading IMO): http://meh.schizofreni.co/random/lulz/2016/01/08/tales-from-...
> "'Transgender' is not a gender. Transgender people may be male, female, gender queer, non-binary... If you want to know if a survey respondent is transgender, you need to explicitly ask that question." I Imagine this read to the survey writer like: "Hello, I'd like to complain about your use of the term Linux on the corporate intranet. A page provides instructions for running the data parsing scripts "on Linux". Si…
In such a question, it would be perfectly reasonable to point out that "Linux is not a text editor. Linux users may use vi, emacs, pico, sam... If you want to know if a survey respondent is a Linux user, you need to explicitly ask that question".
The main thing I've taken away from the whole github situation is that, as a tech company, you should just entirely stay away from public involvement in the social justice sphere. That doesn't mean exclusively hiring white men and sending out Kalanick-style emails; it means keeping your work environment as professional and politically neutral as possible unless absolutely necessary. My employer does a good job of thi…
Naw. Starbucks has done a good job with their corporate responsiblity efforts, bumpy road and all. So it's possible to do well. Any nail that sticks up will get pounded down, someone somewhere will be offended no matter what. So just do your thing and ignore the haters. Edit: To the skeptics, Starbucks was among the first to extend health insurance to domestic partners, and I'm a big fan of their CARE programs. That…
Isn't this the person who ran a code of conduct that has a website which includes things like "thoughtless use of pronouns" and mentions meritocracy as an evil, not a goal to strive for? Can't really say I'm expecting someone like that to be low friction.
She went on a tirade against an Opal contributor a couple years back: https://github.com/opal/opal/issues/941
There's a couple of issues that stand out to me: Github is engaging in risky behaviour by reaching out to individuals (specifically activists) for hire explicitly on the basis of "diversity" and trying to incorporate those individuals in a highly merit-based environment. Secondly, Coraline seems to think that human relationships are a one way street: that she is entitled to be direct and even confrontational or insen…
I got this vibe too. Empathy on the part of others (or rather its lack) is discussed quite a bit, but no consideration is given for the person who wrote the survey who was upset by her feedback. From the subtext it sounds like we are to believe this person was silly to be upset, because the feedback was so anodyne, but it really does seem like a part of the story there is missing. Based on the usage of the "her" pronoun, I'm guessing this other person is also a woman, who also faces issues of harassment and unfairness in tech. And so the lack of empathy for where that person was coming from was quite striking.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Whatever the perceived tone, what Caroline didn't do was suggest improvements, provide examples. It was a teachable moment.
> Whatever the perceived tone, what Caroline didn't do was suggest improvements, provide examples. It was a teachable moment. Seems to me she directly suggested the improvement, after explaining both the reason the existing version was bad and the reason the improvement was better (the two reasons being the same): Quoting directly from the issue she raised, which was not merely quoted but emphasized as a pull-quote i…
She said what was wrong, but did not say what was right. Explicitly. To me, it's an example of "Guess what I'm thinking!" Or more famously, that UI designer who said "Don't make me think!"
Granted, a "data scientist" should already know how to survey, be open to constructive criticism.
I personally would have no idea how to ask the question. Though I'm not a data scientist, I can use google.
http://www.hrc.org/resources/collecting-transgender-inclusiv...
https://www.surveygizmo.com/survey-blog/how-to-write-survey-...
I don't have a horse in this race. I only chimed in because I'm regularly unintentionally offending people, and have been trying to adapt.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Naw. Starbucks has done a good job with their corporate responsiblity efforts, bumpy road and all. So it's possible to do well. Any nail that sticks up will get pounded down, someone somewhere will be offended no matter what. So just do your thing and ignore the haters. Edit: To the skeptics, Starbucks was among the first to extend health insurance to domestic partners, and I'm a big fan of their CARE programs. That…
Bit OT, but I've somewhat always had a desire to work in a software developer role at Starbucks because I drink a lot of their coffee and i like how they seem to treat their regular partners (in an externally facing role, not internal IT). I'm not searching for a new position now, but can I ask what you didn't like there?