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

A Difficult Situation

blog.sendgrid.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

421–430 of 485 posts

Re: A Difficult Situation

#421

Post by dinkumthinkum »

burntsushi wrote: post #404
ceol wrote: post #368

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, but he tried to use it as an example of something that could lead someone to shame him. But... it didn't happen. I don't know many people who would shame someone for assuming an unknown programmer is a man. It sucks, because it does kind of exclude women, but the default gender in our lexicon is aliased to "male." It was pretty tough for me to stop using it and start using "they" instead. It wasn't as tough for…

> Yeah, but he tried to use it as an example of something that could lead someone to shame him. Right. > But... it didn't happen. So? > I don't know many people who would shame someone for assuming an unknown programmer is a man. I don't know many people who would shame someone for saying "I'd fork him on GitHub" or making irreverent "dongle" jokes either. But clearly, they exist. And clearly, public shaming can do s…

I'm just going to say it. If you're going to compare these two things, you're crazy. Some assumption that is partly an accident of language, partly an accident of imagining others to be similar to your self without any other information, and the recognition of statistics, could in, any way, be shame worthy is just nuts.

Re: A Difficult Situation

#422

Post by VigUi7vv8G2 »

ForrestN wrote: post #327
powertower wrote: post #98

They need to update that statement with the fact that the joke was not about her, nor directed at her. Their statement leaves that very important part out, making the reader think otherwise - that she was the victim. At the same time (or around that time) this was happening, here is a conversation she was having - http://i.imgur.com/nRC5J7f.png Another gem from years ago - http://imgur.com/5tbXR2c I'd imagine she was…

This whole situation makes me deeply uncomfortable. First, because it demonstrates the extent to which a company can be brought to its knees by a group of hostile people organized online. Second because hundreds and hundreds of men here and elsewhere seem quite happy to align themselves with an overtly sexist, violently threatening campaign against an individual whose views they disagree with. I am not in a position…

Here's a thought: You don't need to post every single thought you have on twitter. So many of these controversies can be avoided by following that rule

Re: A Difficult Situation

#423

Post by burntsushi »

dinkumthinkum wrote: post #421
burntsushi wrote: post #404

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Yeah, but he tried to use it as an example of something that could lead someone to shame him. Right. > But... it didn't happen. So? > I don't know many people who would shame someone for assuming an unknown programmer is a man. I don't know many people who would shame someone for saying "I'd fork him on GitHub" or making irreverent "dongle" jokes either. But clearly, they exist. And clearly, public shaming can do s…

I'm just going to say it. If you're going to compare these two things, you're crazy. Some assumption that is partly an accident of language, partly an accident of imagining others to be similar to your self without any other information , and the recognition of statistics, could in, any way, be shame worthy is just nuts.

Well yes... That's the point... I also think it's crazy that forking and dongle jokes are shame worthy. And yet, here we are.

Re: A Difficult Situation

#424

Post by WildUtah »

OGC wrote: post #194
mtrimpe wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also known as the good old ad-hominem attack.

> "Doug Walton, Canadian academic and author, has argued that ad hominem reasoning is not always fallacious, and that in some instances, questions of personal conduct, character, motives, etc., are legitimate and relevant to the issue,[10] as when it directly involves hypocrisy, or actions contradicting the subject's words. The philosopher Charles Taylor has argued that ad hominem reasoning is essential to understand…

Doug Walton, Canadian academic and author, has argued that ad hominem reasoning is not always fallacious

Argumentum ad verecundiam fallacy (argument from authority), supporting argumentum ad hominem fallacy.

Nicely done.

Re: A Difficult Situation

#425

Post by bmelton »

enneff wrote: post #341
bmelton wrote: post #286

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That brings about something interesting. While I completely believe that what SendGrid did was justified, what if it had occurred as a result of some other, more nuanced statement than the accusation in question? For example, I believe that the second amendment allows Americans ownership of AR-15s, which some people refer to as 'assault rifles'. This is a hot button issue right now, and there are reasonable arguments…

> Is "Developer Evangelist" a 'star-like' job position where I lose my right to privacy as a result of it? I don't know what this has to do with privacy. Adria made her comments in the public sphere, seemingly to deliberately solicit attention. If you take on a role in the public sphere, you should expect scrutiny. I am a public representative of a software company in a similar role to the one Adria had. I regularly…

That's a very fair answer, and I thank you for it.

I suppose, in regards to 'privacy', I mention it because at least early on, Adria was commenting on her 'personal' Twitter feed. Understandably that Twitter account is public, I'm sure at least in part because of her role, but at the same time, I routinely make comments on socio-political issues on Facebook or Google Plus which thankfully have better privacy filters (to my knowledge at least, I don't use Twitter for much of anything).

Do you consider your role as an 'always-on' sort of position? If you're at a dinner party that consists almost entirely of close personal friends, do you still monitor your actions on the chance that the one person there you don't know might be a potential customer?

Re: A Difficult Situation

#426

Post by [deleted] »

enneff wrote: post #341
bmelton wrote: post #286

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That brings about something interesting. While I completely believe that what SendGrid did was justified, what if it had occurred as a result of some other, more nuanced statement than the accusation in question? For example, I believe that the second amendment allows Americans ownership of AR-15s, which some people refer to as 'assault rifles'. This is a hot button issue right now, and there are reasonable arguments…

> Is "Developer Evangelist" a 'star-like' job position where I lose my right to privacy as a result of it? I don't know what this has to do with privacy. Adria made her comments in the public sphere, seemingly to deliberately solicit attention. If you take on a role in the public sphere, you should expect scrutiny. I am a public representative of a software company in a similar role to the one Adria had. I regularly…

[deleted]

Re: A Difficult Situation

#427

Post by [deleted] »

enneff wrote: post #341
bmelton wrote: post #286

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That brings about something interesting. While I completely believe that what SendGrid did was justified, what if it had occurred as a result of some other, more nuanced statement than the accusation in question? For example, I believe that the second amendment allows Americans ownership of AR-15s, which some people refer to as 'assault rifles'. This is a hot button issue right now, and there are reasonable arguments…

> Is "Developer Evangelist" a 'star-like' job position where I lose my right to privacy as a result of it? I don't know what this has to do with privacy. Adria made her comments in the public sphere, seemingly to deliberately solicit attention. If you take on a role in the public sphere, you should expect scrutiny. I am a public representative of a software company in a similar role to the one Adria had. I regularly…

[deleted]

Re: A Difficult Situation

#428

Post by beatpanda »

I will never use SendGrid. They just contributed to the already extreme difficulty of reporting sexual harassment and they should be ashamed of themselves. I hope they get sued for this and lose.

Re: A Difficult Situation

#429

Post by burntsushi »

ceol wrote: post #410
burntsushi wrote: post #404

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Yeah, but he tried to use it as an example of something that could lead someone to shame him. Right. > But... it didn't happen. So? > I don't know many people who would shame someone for assuming an unknown programmer is a man. I don't know many people who would shame someone for saying "I'd fork him on GitHub" or making irreverent "dongle" jokes either. But clearly, they exist. And clearly, public shaming can do s…

Ugh, I really hate it when people split posts up like that. It gets unwieldy and strips the post of its overall context. I'm guilty of it, but I've been trying to cut back. It makes my posts smaller since I have to reply to the meat of it, you know? Not just its individual components. Anyway, I'm saying that someone who would feel threatened by accidentally assuming a male gender might not necessarily be on their sid…

I recognize the annoyance of splitting up a post. I find it incredibly difficult to avoid if I am to achieve the level of precision and concision that I want in my replies. This is partly due to my unimaginative writing and partly due to my desire to be as unambiguous as possible. Splitting out the post caters to both, but at the cost of continuity and a more pleasant reading experience.

What exactly does it take to have knowledge of the existence of a threat? In the case that has provoked all of this, there weren't any warning signs of impending doom. It therefore seams reasonable to me that nobody can know if a threat exists or not until after-the-fact. If it's unknowable, then what's the point in bringing it up anyway?

More importantly, this isn't an academic point. Feelings can't be invalidated. It doesn't make sense to speak of feelings or perceptions as invalid or valid---they simply exist in our minds. Perhaps they will go away or subside with more careful reflection and discussion, but that doesn't mean it is somehow invalid to acknowledge them. Particularly in this context, where presumably, this feeling was fostered by the recent kerfuffle.

The only thing we can say about the validity of the commenter's feelings or perceptions is that either they are truly what the commenter believes he felt, or the commenter is lying. The first is the only useful assumption given what we know; so we go with it.

So what if the commenter escaped without any public shaming? That has no impact on the commenter's feelings or perception at the time and therefore is missing the point of the commenter's reflection.

Re: A Difficult Situation

#430

Post by [deleted] »

mtrimpe wrote: post #366
vacri wrote: post #263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Go read Amanda Blum's piece instead, as it actually has insight and thought behind it. This is just a bit of humour, making egregious errors like "the internet will never forget" (seriously, how many scandals has the internet forgotten?) and "careers are permanently ended" (again, seriously, look at any number of successful public figures and the gaffes they made earlier in life).

I read Amanda's piece and until raganwald's it was indeed the best piece I had read so far. Amanda however vilifies Aria because she considers her too easily offended and finds her feminist agenda obnoxious. I don't, because I believe she has the right to be a slightly obnoxious feminist and we should be defending her right to be that, even when we don't personally agree with it. Raganwald expresses my more deep-seat…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN