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

In defence of Douglas Crockford

atom-morgan.github.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

371–380 of 450 posts

Re: In defence of Douglas Crockford

#371

Post by tobltobs »

rtpg wrote: post #215
gnarbarian wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm willing to bet that he didn't pose any danger to these people other than having the gall to publicly harbor opinions they are uncomfortable with. In other words, diversity does not extend to diversity of opinion.

So what? The talk organizers were faced with a dilemma: either keep Crawford and lose a bunch of other speakers or lose Crawford but keep others I do think clarification is needed, but I could see "being a jerk " as a legit reason to not want to associate with someone. People do the same with people like Torvalds Being unliked is also a reason that people won't want to associate with you.

I do not understand how banning people due to some unproved, anonym accusations will result in a more inclusive society. Actually it sounds like a surefire way to achieve the antipode.

Re: In defence of Douglas Crockford

#372

Post by tptacek »

DrJokepu wrote: post #369
tptacek wrote: post #342

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, it's not. This Manichaean view of intolerance to overt racism, sexism, classism, whatever --- it's bogus, and deserves to be challenged. When spelled out: "opposition at private events to (say) racism requires that event to make common cause with the evil, gathering forces of political repression", it doesn't even sound credible. But that view in fact appeals superficially to message board nerds because it trigge…

Yeah, I don't know about that. I don't think it's possible to consistently apply good judgement about subjective and polarising issues in highly visible contexts without excessive costs. Judgement is often possible in business because good judgement and self interest are frequently closely aligned. It is also often possible in government, because there are laws and rules in place that try to ensure an impartial and f…

Your argument here is that it's harder to moderate a small, in-real-life, private, subject-focussed event than it is to moderate one of the Internet's most popular open- to- all- comers technical message boards?

Re: In defence of Douglas Crockford

#373

Post by bsder »

madeofpalk wrote: post #136
bsder wrote: post #100

This is becoming increasingly concerning to me. The problem is that there is no way for the person affected to receive "justice", "fairness", or "a day in court". You want to not invite somebody? Fine. You want to disinvite somebody? Okay, but be prepared to be called a jerk. But assassinating someone's professional character publicly? You'd better be standing on REALLY solid ground for a REALLY good reason. Crockfor…

You've kind of just resolved your concerns yourself. > The problem is that there is no way for the person affected to receive "justice", "fairness", or "a day in court". Of course there is. There's 'private arbitration' - just resolve the matters yourself like regular people do. Then then, if the victim feels particularly damaged, there's the courts. > Crockford might just ignore this--it's probably the best course o…

> Yup. He doesn't need 'justice' because he doesn't feel he's been particularly wronged.

Not necessarily.

He may simply have done the calculation and decided that it isn't worth the money/time/press. That doesn't mean he doesn't feel wronged.

In addition, this conference used Crockford's name as a speaker for the purpose of attracting attendees. I didn't see them offering corresponding refunds now that he's not going to be a speaker. Edit: Apparently this is no longer true. How do I create a strikethrough formatting?

Re: In defence of Douglas Crockford

#374

Post by cheez »

ajamesm wrote: post #303
tptacek wrote: post #299

Unlike the controversies about Strangeloop (which uninvited Curtis Yarvin) and Lambdaconf (which lost the overwhelming majority of its sponsors due to accepting Yarvin), this --- based on the evidence at hand --- seems entirely stupid. Unfortunately, there's no rulebook conference organizers (or their Greek choruses on message boards) can consult to say when rejecting a speaker is a good idea or not. It's a judgement…

> Unfortunately, there's no rulebook conference organizers (or their Greek choruses on message boards) can consult to say when rejecting a speaker is a good idea or not. It's a judgement call. There is! if they bothered to write one. I know, I know, everyone gets up in arms about Codes of Conduct, because they're oppressive SJW tools used to silence men, or whatever. But this, right here, is their use case. If you wa…

If only there was a system of rule making where those accused of violations could defend themselves before being found guilty.

If only...

Re: In defence of Douglas Crockford

#375

Post by detaro »

bsder wrote: post #373
madeofpalk wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You've kind of just resolved your concerns yourself. > The problem is that there is no way for the person affected to receive "justice", "fairness", or "a day in court". Of course there is. There's 'private arbitration' - just resolve the matters yourself like regular people do. Then then, if the victim feels particularly damaged, there's the courts. > Crockford might just ignore this--it's probably the best course o…

> Yup. He doesn't need 'justice' because he doesn't feel he's been particularly wronged. Not necessarily. He may simply have done the calculation and decided that it isn't worth the money/time/press. That doesn't mean he doesn't feel wronged. In addition, this conference used Crockford's name as a speaker for the purpose of attracting attendees. I didn't see them offering corresponding refunds now that he's not going…

> I didn't see them offering corresponding refunds now that he's not going to be a speaker.

they seem to be doing that:

We are altering our refund policy due to this line up change. If you would like a refund please go to your order confirmation on Eventbrite and request it there.

(end of http://nodevember.org/statement.html)

Re: In defence of Douglas Crockford

#376

Post by IsaacL »

olalonde wrote: post #56
danso wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

re: whether Crockford has a case about libel. The allegations are published and the OP links to the original complaint on Medium: https://medium.com/@nodebotanist/why-i-won-t-be-speaking-at-... Furthermore, the best defense against libel is the truth. Part of the complaint is an opinion based on public statements made by Crockford (the "slut-shaming"). The other published complaint is that Crockford said to the compl…

> The allegations are published and the OP links to the original complaint on Medium: https://medium.com/@nodebotanist/why-i-won-t-be-speaking-at-... That passive-aggressive "update" is quite telling of his/her personality: "I’ve switched comments to ‘not visible.’ I won’t be reading them. I don’t feel the need to justify this, either. Thanks <3."

"I’ve switched comments to ‘not visible.’ I won’t be reading them. I don’t feel the need to justify this, either. Thanks Ironically, that language "triggered" very bad memories of an extremely dishonest and passive-aggressive person I once worked with.

Re: In defence of Douglas Crockford

#377

Post by IsaacL »

tzs wrote: post #129
tootie wrote: post #2

I'm pretty sympathetic to the cause of feminism especially in technology and I cringe hard at a lot of the casual sexism that gets thrown around, but this is truly baffling. Assuming this is all they actually have on him this is nothing more than very clever word play with zero gender inferences to be made.

> I'm pretty sympathetic to the cause of feminism especially in technology and I cringe hard at a lot of the casual sexism that gets thrown around, but this is truly baffling. It's not that baffling. Being a victim of harassment raises your status in certain circles. People in those circles tend to accept your word without requiring any other evidence, and so naturally some people will find harassment in anything tha…

Dude, dude, dude, you've almost identified the real issue here (interpreting everything as harassment for the sake of an agenda), and then gone off onto wild elaborate tangents about social status and evolutionary biology.

Look at the actual people who incite these campaigns (e.g., https://twitter.com/nexxylove/status/771503661956501504).

"Don't bother to examine a folly, ask yourself only what it accomplishes". These people have a laser-focused sensitivity on actions which make certain groups feel unwelcome. They can't be unaware of the messages they themselves are sending. Who are they trying to make feel unwelcome?

Re: In defence of Douglas Crockford

#378

Post by nkurz »

xwvvvvwx wrote: post #292
mpweiher wrote: post #283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In fact, it is pretty much the opposite of what they said.

Really? What did I misunderstand here?

Likely you did not understand that the clause starting with "like Grace Hopper [and] Barbara Liskov" applies to "wrote some software" not to "instead of talking". '10938101' is actively praising women who write code, and disrespecting those (of both sexes) who only talk. The attack is not directed at women, but at empty talk by non-practictioners.

Re: In defence of Douglas Crockford

#379

Post by throwawayspon »

I'd be willing to place a small wager that the people who were uncomfortable were also connected to one of the conference sponsors. And that the sponsor threatened to pull out if this person wasn't removed. I'd place an smaller wager that the sponsor is Auth0.

Re: In defence of Douglas Crockford

#380

Post by DrJokepu »

tptacek wrote: post #372
DrJokepu wrote: post #369

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, I don't know about that. I don't think it's possible to consistently apply good judgement about subjective and polarising issues in highly visible contexts without excessive costs. Judgement is often possible in business because good judgement and self interest are frequently closely aligned. It is also often possible in government, because there are laws and rules in place that try to ensure an impartial and f…

Your argument here is that it's harder to moderate a small, in-real-life, private, subject-focussed event than it is to moderate one of the Internet's most popular open- to- all- comers technical message boards?

No, that wasn't my argument. Obviously moderating HN requires a lot more effort. That being said, an argument could be made that the HN's status and the people it has access to makes it easier to successfully implement a decent system of moderation.

My actual argument was that it's rather difficult to exercise consistently good judgement when surrounded by an angry mob, if that makes sense.

Post reply on HN