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

421–430 of 450 posts

Re: In defence of Douglas Crockford

#421

Post by err4nt »

fernandotakai wrote: post #295
brakmic wrote: post #183

Such things could have a very negative effect on people whose native language isn't English. I mean, if even native speakers get into troubles so easily what should I, as a non-native speaker, expect? I maintain a tiny blog and because of possible language barriers I decided to write all of my texts in English. It could've been much easier for me to write in German, of course, but this would exclude so many people. A…

i have the exact same problem -- a lot of times, i refrain from speaking about specific subjects because i'm afraid i'll be either misunderstood or judged because my culture treats this kind of subject in a different way. even on conferences, i try to only watch the talks and don't interact with people that much -- you never know if a person will take you the wrong way for using the wrong pronoun. (anecdote mode: onc…

Oh man, I'm sorry you had to go through that, and I am impressed and so happy to hear that this is (and always has been) something you care about so deeply.

Don't let bad experiences turn you off from sharing in the future. I'm glad you used your voice here on HN today! I'd rather hear you say my name wrong, than miss out on what you have to say :D

Re: In defence of Douglas Crockford

#422

Post by rhapsodic »

Organizations will not stop caving to these vicious, hateful cry-bullies until caving becomes more costly than not caving. It wouldn't take very many complaints and boycott threats against their corporate sponsors to make Nodevember radioactive. Next year, there would be no sponsors. And if everyone who has had a bellyful of this cry-bullying would boycott the Nodevember conference, there would be no more Nodevember conference.

That would serve as an example for other organizations, when they choose how to respond to the demands of future cry-bullies.

Re: In defence of Douglas Crockford

#423

Post by err4nt »

brakmic wrote: post #183

Such things could have a very negative effect on people whose native language isn't English. I mean, if even native speakers get into troubles so easily what should I, as a non-native speaker, expect? I maintain a tiny blog and because of possible language barriers I decided to write all of my texts in English. It could've been much easier for me to write in German, of course, but this would exclude so many people. A…

> I mean, if even native speakers get into troubles so easily what should I, as a non-native speaker, expect?

To be honest, I don't think the issue they have with him is one of words, I think it's one of ideas. If people like this disagree with you, they would disapprove of your ideas in German too.

I am glad you have chosen to write in English, and I believe your reasoning (wider global audience) is a good one. Your English also seems great, so please don't let stories like this hold you back from sharing in the future!

Re: In defence of Douglas Crockford

#424

Post by prance »

justaaron wrote: post #288
prance wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I meant "owe" more like as in "you owe me one". If contractual obligations for ticket holders exist, I guess they'd have to offer a refund. Regarding the other meaning, I could only repeat myself: they state that some other speakers have big problems with Crockford, and that they chose them over him. I think it's totally ok for them to do that, even without providing more information. In fact, it's totally conceivabl…

it's conceivable, and that's the issue... innuendo ALSO says something... it says: these charges are big enough and serious enough to grant anonomity to said "other speakers" and grant secrecy to the stated charges. Bottom line: they are a private entity and can do whatever they wish to, more or less, however, I don't consider their petty behavior reasonable in any way, especially given the context and further info r…

Your arguments only make sense if you assume that the people refusing to speak if Crockford is there are the bullies, while they and the organisers seem to say that Crockford is the bully. Who is right? We cannot know from the available facts.

If you believe the organisers' reasons to disinvite him were not "good enough" (whatever that is), well, then just don't go there or get a refund.

Re: In defence of Douglas Crockford

#425

Post by prance »

curioussavage wrote: post #415
prance wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I meant "owe" more like as in "you owe me one". If contractual obligations for ticket holders exist, I guess they'd have to offer a refund. Regarding the other meaning, I could only repeat myself: they state that some other speakers have big problems with Crockford, and that they chose them over him. I think it's totally ok for them to do that, even without providing more information. In fact, it's totally conceivabl…

Well if you go by their announcement then it seems they decided they owe their ticket holders. They are now offering refunds. I wonder why..

The reason would be that they announced a speakers list which they then changed. Of course this happens all the time at conferences without refunds offered, so I guess it's very fair from them to do this.

Re: In defence of Douglas Crockford

#426

Post by bryanrasmussen »

angry_octet wrote: post #240
rtpg wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Being a speaker at the same event is hardly being forced to associate with someone, nor indeed a reason to attempt to publicly repudiate them. Additionally, in my experience Linus Tovalds is not a jerk. Is this something you sense you get by reading email threads? Perhaps you associate a lack of politeness and deference with being a jerk, but it really isn't the same.

I'm pretty sure lack of politeness is one of the defining traits of a jerk, yes. Which I'm quite aware of because as a lot of programmers I am something of a jerk.

Re: In defence of Douglas Crockford

#427

Post by sebringj »

csanch4 wrote: post #15

I thought this wouldn't be an issue in CS; thankfully it only seems to be the Js community -- or at least I hope so. Medium is now becoming less informative on technologies and software into a platform for finger pointing and complaining, which is really depressing imo.

Drum roll...the biggest undisputed champion of all assholes is... and i love him... Linus Torvalds (tah dah!). The difference is when he says something that could be taken as offensive, the community is much less diverse, extremely so and tends to share his sentiment or simply reveres him so much they stay silent. Crockford, the genius in his own right that he is, does not get the same respect in this free for all culture JS has become. I see nothing wrong with having that type of culture but it is hard to see someone so cool being treated with disrespect and nodevember is just a cancer in my eyes at this point.

Re: In defence of Douglas Crockford

#428

Post by tajen »

tajen wrote: post #273
cryptica wrote: post #235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can relate to the feeling of being a 'silent' minority. As an introverted white guy who lives in a foreign country, I feel that I am being discriminated against all the time. I literally have to force myself to act extroverted in order to succeed in the workplace. People just assume that if you're a guy, you're just a confident hussler. I know several introverted white guys who are extremely qualified but missed ou…

The quantity of white males who are removed from their position in a possibly career-ending way without trial or due explanation (e.g. Mozilla CEO, GitHub CEO, various conferences, colleagues), plus the quantity of government aid and help that are offered based on people's gender, and not based on people's weaknesses, now makes me uncomfortable. White males who work hard deserve a life too.

22 points on the comment above (which I can't edit anymore). As the 74th comment on a page (of 640 points), it's a pretty good score: I would say that gender justice is a feeling shared by many people.

Re: In defence of Douglas Crockford

#429

Post by pryce »

Corrado wrote: post #419
pryce wrote: post #396

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nodevember is offering refunds, so it's very hard to see how this could be a scam, and difficult to imagine how Nodevember would stand to make anything but a large loss by removing Crockford as a speaker. They chose to proceed with this anyway, which is indicative of serious concerns. Removing him as a speaker and remaining quiet about the exact reasons can mean any number of things. Suppose they have compelling reas…

Then again, if you don't have some solid evidence that a talk will be offensive, how can you ban it. Is this the Minority Report where you are punished for things you haven't done yet? Mr. Crockford is a leading Javascript expert, kicking him our of your Javascript conference should only be done with some very compelling facts not just hearsay and conjecture that you can't tell anyone about.

> Crockford is a leading Javascript expert,

How is this relevant? This idea that we should apply different standards to "leading Javascript experts" than other people is far more troubling than the idea that a speaker might be invited to and then disinvited from a conference from time to time.

> should only be done with some very compelling facts not just hearsay and conjecture

I have already given several plausible examples of when a conference could have grounds enough to rescind a speaker invitation without having the grounds to make public accusations.

Re: In defence of Douglas Crockford

#430

Post by PKop »

eli wrote: post #224
rdtsc wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They said "We will also be removing Douglas Crockford from our keynote speakers list to help make the conference a comfortable environment for all." Imagine saying that about anyone, to any group (here it was to the whole world). Let's say the invite you to a gathering publicly then wrote a tweet about "We will also be removing eli from list of invited guests, to help make the venue a comfortable environment for all"…

But is it true that other guests have complained about me making them uncomfortable?

That's all it takes huh? Do you not see the power in that?
Post reply on HN