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

PyCon Code of Conduct changed to avoid public shaming

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 387 posts

Re: PyCon Code of Conduct changed to avoid public shaming

#311

Post by [deleted] »

CodeMage wrote: post #76
dos1 wrote: post #27

One of the reasons I've taken an interest in this whole fiasco is that I occasionally make "colorful" jokes. Not dissimilar from the two guys at PyCon. I make every attempt to keep these jokes private between my friends and I, but I'm sure others have heard me make them. Some people might find them funny, others may be offended. It scares me to think that making an offhand penis joke could result in being publicly ou…

I believe she's being a hypocrite by taking offense one day, and making her own penis joke on Twitter the next. I've seen that argument tossed about. There's a difference between reading someone's Twitter stream and hearing someone's joke while sitting in the audience at a convention. The former is reading content from someone you chose to follow, the latter is the equivalent of having people talk behind you in a mov…

[deleted]

Re: PyCon Code of Conduct changed to avoid public shaming

#312

Post by danielweber »

drharris wrote: post #285
Cushman wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, and let's say that I'm offended by your face, and I want a million dollars for that . How do we resolve this? It seems to me that we exist in a community that has a pretty well-evolved process for determining what is reasonable.

We take it to court, and if it doesn't fit within the boundaries of law, a judge has two options: toss out the case, or attempt to expand the boundaries of law by interpreting existing law in a new way. If the former, we are at an impasse, so how can we determine if our offenses are legitimate or not? If the latter, then now it is up to a judge and/or jury to use their subjective reasoning to pass judgment on whether…

For a functioning society, there must be some kind of barrier between "legally acceptable" and "socially acceptable."

"If it's not illegal, then it's okay" will not lead you anywhere you like.

Re: PyCon Code of Conduct changed to avoid public shaming

#313

Post by LockeWatts »

imsofuture wrote: post #56
OoTheNigerian wrote: post #26

After reading all sides of the story, I see why there is so much anger towards Adria. However, it is unacceptable for her or SendGrid to be attacked digitally. Adria did an arguably right thing in a wrong way at the wrong time. 1. Assuming the way she said it happened is correct, the guys behind her made a sexual (forking/fucking; Dongle/Penis) not sexist joke. If it were even to be seen as sexist, it was towards men…

1) You don't get to tell someone what is offensive to them. 2) Totally agree, it was not a wise choice. 3) You don't get to tell someone what is offensive to them. 4) You don't get to tell someone what is offensive to them. 5) You don't get to tell someone what is offensive to them. 6) It's true, not all the best choices were made.

Sure, I can't tell you what you should be offended by, but I can tell you your offense is unimportant and selfish.

Re: PyCon Code of Conduct changed to avoid public shaming

#314

Post by LockeWatts »

hackinthebochs wrote: post #288
king_jester wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Everyone says things in private they wouldn't want their employer to hear. That's the difference in this case. The men in question were not in the personal life having a private discussion, they were attending a conference that their employer was a sponsor of and they were marked as being representatives of that sponsor company via their badges. They are already damaging their own and their company's reputation by…

It's already been established that the joke was not sexist. Please stop claiming that it was.

Good luck with that statement, buddy. Anything remotely related to sex and said by men is sexist. Apparently. Don't ask me why.

Re: PyCon Code of Conduct changed to avoid public shaming

#315

Post by protomyth »

mst wrote: post #208
robomartin wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In many ways, the issue here boils down to what happened to these guys in the context of having joked around with each other in a private conversation. And what happened is tragic. Someone got fired for it. Someone's livelihood was affected by this. Not to mention the emotional shock this surely caused. What's right and what's wrong? Sometimes the answer isn't easy. Private conversations between friends have been kno…

Once, sat in the audience at OSCON with people I knew, a particularly inappropriate joke occurred to me that I thought the friend sat next to me would appreciate. I sent it to him via private message using my laptop. That way, the conversation was -actually- private, rather than 'private plus whoever else sat near me overheard what I said'. This is not a difficult concept for me, though my primary motivation was 'not…

> That way, the conversation was -actually- private

Except if the person in the seat behind you took a screen shot of you or your friends computer screen and then posted it on twitter. There are enough epic fail photos of people playing games during lectures / senate voting to make that a real possibility.

Re: PyCon Code of Conduct changed to avoid public shaming

#316

Post by LockeWatts »

EthanHeilman wrote: post #209
SeanDav wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Since when did it become ok to vilify someone for a private conversation? A private conversation in a public area is still private. This woman was guilty of listening to a private conversation, taking some sort of offence and then going out of her way to publicly shame them. Anyone trying to defend her is not thinking very clearly. If you look at her own posting history she is guilty of off-colour jokes and downright…

Perhaps irrelevant counterexamples: >Since when did it become ok to vilify someone for a private conversation? * Having a private conversation during a movie or play is generally considered the action of the worse sort of villain. * Plenty of people have been vilified and sent to jail on the basis of statements made privately. * Just because something is private doesn't mean it isn't disruptive to people within earsh…

>* You don't generate a cone of silence by addressing a statement to a particular person. It is likely that people around you can still hear you.

And... so what? If I walk through a cafeteria and someone says something I don't like while chatting with their friends, I have the right to get them fired over it? I don't understand how people are advocating that.

Re: PyCon Code of Conduct changed to avoid public shaming

#317

Post by alxp »

lopatin wrote: post #218
CodeMage wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe she's being a hypocrite by taking offense one day, and making her own penis joke on Twitter the next. I've seen that argument tossed about. There's a difference between reading someone's Twitter stream and hearing someone's joke while sitting in the audience at a convention. The former is reading content from someone you chose to follow, the latter is the equivalent of having people talk behind you in a mov…

There's a difference between reading someone's Twitter stream and hearing someone's joke while sitting in the audience at a convention. I've pondered this myself and, at least in this situation, I disagree. How can it be a fireable offense to make a penis joke in a room where a few people may overhear it, while it being completely ok to tweet the penis joke to the whole room? I know you would only receive the joke if…

> How can it be a fireable offense to make a penis joke in a room where a few people may overhear it

You should take that up with the people who did the firing. The only thing that happened at PyCon was that the organizers told them to knock it off and they did.

Re: PyCon Code of Conduct changed to avoid public shaming

#318

Post by cmiles74 »

jack_trades wrote: post #175
dos1 wrote: post #27

One of the reasons I've taken an interest in this whole fiasco is that I occasionally make "colorful" jokes. Not dissimilar from the two guys at PyCon. I make every attempt to keep these jokes private between my friends and I, but I'm sure others have heard me make them. Some people might find them funny, others may be offended. It scares me to think that making an offhand penis joke could result in being publicly ou…

Public shame is not a problem. Public shame is less about an individual and more about sharing expectations with a community. Shame on people who can't help but blurt out clumsy penis jokes in essentially tight quarters at a professional conference. Go and make colorful jokes everywhere and then defend yourself on twitter. Who's stopping you/them? They have twitter accounts, no? Represent yourselves. More words tell…

I think we would all do well to pay more attention to this comment. While I disagree entirely with jack_trades, I believe their comment provides the most compelling rationale for both Aria Richards' behavior and that of the PyCon staffers.

It's been a while, but I have encountered these ideas before. This idea that reporting someone to those in authority because their behavior is "indecent" is, somehow, "speaking truth to power". That the off-hand comment of a person is a clear indication of "a sense of entitlement" and "and indication of power and control". The idea that some puns around the term "forking" and "dongles" is not only anti-social but also a clear rape analogy. You may have heard it before as well: 70's era feminist literary theory.

It's not my intention to argue about the validity of Gilbert and Gubar's arguments, I just want to point out that's where I first read about these ideas and first heard a lot of this terminology. I think it's also worthwhile to note that these ideas really took hold in academia, they were talked about quite a bit when I was in college during the 90's.

In any case, in my opinion, the real problem is the complete inversion of power. I understand that there are many environments that make women feel unwelcome and I agree that this needs to change and should change. On the other hand, an environment where men feel unwelcome is not the solution. The goal should be that everyone feels welcome. Aria's solution, keeping everyone on their toes for fear of being "reported" to "the authorities", is no solution.

Post reply on HN