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

261–270 of 288 posts

Re: Public Apology to Jeremy Howard

#261

Post by Volundr »

bosie wrote: post #79
mnd999 wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s been passed to the board of directors to investigate further. I would expect to hear more once they’ve completed their investigation.

who seem to be overlapping quite a bit: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24945944

There is one person on both, and the apology clearly states he won't be involved:

Because of the missteps of this committee, we have asked the NumFOCUS Board of Directors, minus those involved, to take over the work of the committee as outlined in the appeals process of our enforcement guide.

Re: Public Apology to Jeremy Howard

#262

Post by protomyth »

mcguire wrote: post #54
greenburger wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The letter was signed by the The NumFOCUS Code of Conduct Enforcement Committee. The members of that committee are listed on their code of conduct site. Seems pretty transparent to me. https://numfocus.org/code-of-conduct#persons-responsible

NumFOCUS Code of Conduct Enforcement Team: Leah Silen, Executive Director Andy Terrel, President Nicole Foster, Executive Operations Administrator Walker Chabbott, Communications & Marketing Manager NumFOCUS Board of Directors: Andy Terrel Lorena Barba Jane Herriman Sylvain Corlay Katrina Riehl Stéfan van der Walt James Powell I was wondering how much overlap there would be.

Why is the Communications & Marketing Manager on the CoC? That's one scary red flag.

Re: Public Apology to Jeremy Howard

#263

Post by skinkestek »

omginternets wrote: post #132
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 g…

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

You can vouch:

- click on the timestamp

- click vouch

- IIRC dang will taking vouching privileges if he spots someone abusing it

Re: Public Apology to Jeremy Howard

#264

Post by LegitShady »

criddell wrote: post #158
part1of2 wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's overlap with the people on that Committee and the Board of Directors, so the transparency isn't exactly their intention

Sounds like The Code of Conduct Enforcement Team themselves need a code of conduct to operate against. I recommend immediately establishing a Code of Conduct Enforcement Team Code of Conduct. And since any CoC is meaningless when not enforced, there needs to be a Code of Conduct Enforcement Team Code of Conduct Enforcement Team.

its codes of conduct all the way down.

Re: Public Apology to Jeremy Howard

#265

Post by LegitShady »

marcinzm wrote: post #253
PragmaticPulp wrote: post #190

This is a classic non-apology. It’s well-written enough that it sounds good on quick read, but let’s break it down: 1. They use “We’re sorry you feel that way” to recast the issue as a simple miscommunication. > We acknowledge that it was an extremely stressful experience, being summoned to an interview with several members of a committee, after a week had passed, and without knowing the nature of the complaint. 2. N…

Given some of the Twitter replies they've succeeded in their PR move of making the controversy go away with the least change, growth or cost to themselves.

maybe im not looking at the right places but this seems to have gotten far more attention on hackernews than twitter.

Re: Public Apology to Jeremy Howard

#266

Post by LegitShady »

jackallis wrote: post #93

i hope they called Jeremy first to apologize before posting this.

i dont think he would take the call, given his response. they weren't fair from the start, dismissive and one sided, and now have a non-apology for PR purposes.

They broke into his house, robbed him blind, burned it down, and are now apologizing for the communication error of not having knocked. Next time they'll work on the communication - the one sided dismissive process and lack of fair treatment, and the ridiculous nature of the issue itself, is not in the apology.

This is PR.

Re: Public Apology to Jeremy Howard

#267

Post by throwaway69123 »

For those of you who are pro CoC I would be genuinely interested in your perspective if the laws were written as vaguely and subjectively as most CoC are? It is my opinion and from what I’ve seen the majority of enforcement actions occur in the least fair way possible and have more in common with dictatorship kangaroo courts than those we are accustomed to in the western world.

Re: Public Apology to Jeremy Howard

#268

Post by tkfu »

bryanlarsen wrote: post #237
btilly wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And my judgement after all available information is that they are straight up lying. Here is why. His stated recollection is that they said, “that is what the reporters stated, and what we found” and to his asking why his statement was not requested, “we all watched the video, so we could see for ourselves the violation”. What they said in his version is very clear. That is not a miscommunication. Calling it a "misco…

Isn't concluding that they are lying without solid evidence basically the same crime that you're accusing them of committing against Jeremy Howard?

No, not even a little bit. There is a gigantic gulf between an organization with power in the situation making an official finding, and an individual with no power over the situation looking at the facts and forming a conclusion.

Re: Public Apology to Jeremy Howard

#269

Post by marcinzm »

harlanji wrote: post #252
marcinzm wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 ap…

What I’m saying is that the statement “and they apologized” is true and very significant. It’s extremely uncommon to get that much. Picturing a job interview scenario. People are all emotion and that fragment does the job. Not picturing IRC with a bunch of invested people here, in which case yes, your point is logically valid there.

In my experience the people doing the interview are not at all emotional during a job interview. They're coldly cautious if anything. So an apology that isn't a full retraction won't matter since the person is still a potential risk in their eyes.

Re: Public Apology to Jeremy Howard

#270

Post by tchaffee »

hevelvarik wrote: post #198

Wow this that story where the dude said he thought the other guy was wrong. And this is their response to their handling of it. They weren’t sure if there was a violation but responded to a couple complaints by bringing this guy in front of a committee of sorts to get to the bottom of it and are now investigating their process to ensure a better process What a torrential tempest in the tiniest of teapots, sometime yo…

> there was a time when you could organize a conference or group or project without conjuring a set of rules governing social interactions

Yes there was a "magical" time of a couple decades like that, I remember it well!

No rules were needed because it was an ivory tower of almost all white men. Who far too often would act inappropriately towards the very few women who would come to a tech conference. Making the sexism problem in our industry even worse by driving women away from these events.

Is a code of conduct all on its own going to fix these problems? Probably not. And as we have seen in this case, they can even be misused. The important thing to me is that people are working to solve the long-existing problems of sexism and racism in our industry. And learning in the process about what works and what does not work. Making mistakes is part of the learning process in improving anything in life. If you think the tech industry and conferences don't need to be improved, then the ivory tower worked for you. Not so much for others.

> If people enjoy being treated and treating everyone like babies

The sexism and racism didn't fix itself, did it? Clearly some people in our industry do need loads of hand holding, clearly defined rules, and consequences, in order to act like respectful adults in a social setting.

Post reply on HN