Earlier quoted context omitted.
Made me think of this tweet I saw the other day: "Everyone who questions my obviously compassionate and righteous cause is a dangerous sociopath" — Many sociopaths
Go on, tell us why gay marriage shouldn't be legal. To elaborate, you're implying there's a different, valid side to this argument. I'm curious to hear it.
How One Stupid Tweet Blew Up Justine Sacco’s Life
491–500 of 596 posts
Re: How One Stupid Tweet Blew Up Justine Sacco’s Life
#492Earlier quoted context omitted.
This and many other problems are instantly rectified when one stops using shit like twitter or fb. Communicating with friends? fine, perfectly acceptable, PM or share with some reduced circle. Trying to be funny in the world where someone could get butthurt over a joke that was snooped from the conversation not intended for their ears? You're asking for it (for the lack of better wording). And yes I do realize the ir…
A tweet is not part of a private conversation and the user in question should have known that - particularly considering their profession. Twitter & FB aren't the problem. A lack of awareness and judgement is.
Re: How One Stupid Tweet Blew Up Justine Sacco’s Life
#493Earlier quoted context omitted.
The comments weren't awful. It was really a bad judgement call because it violated the principle "don't be disruptive to make a point", which I really didn't consider very clearly before doing it. The reason I was annoyed about it was because signatures are the way you see who is saying something in a conversation thread. Back then you'd click on the person's username and get easy access to their pages, talk page, bl…
Were you not in a position to edit his signature, or get it edited? You jumped the gun.
Re: How One Stupid Tweet Blew Up Justine Sacco’s Life
#494Earlier quoted context omitted.
> you really don't have freedom of speech when you can get mugged by being obnoxious online If you published something similarly obnoxious in a newspaper before the Internet, I'm sure you'd get a similarly angry response from some people, and quite possibly have someone harass you in person if they knew where to find you. If you stood on top of a soap box and shouted offensive crap at the public, you might have stuff…
You're missing a crucial point: whatever an average person does lasts forever. It used to be that you had to be somebody notable before this happened, which meant you had a recompense -- you were already famous for some reason. Now, the average shit you might say at the bar to your friends can mark you for all eternity. That's something unheralded in the history of communication, and it's horrifying.
Perhaps the so called right to be forgotten deserves serious consideration at least for some kinds of instances. Say, you can have indiscretion purged but not info on a felony.
On the other hand... In addition to searching foe people who get called out for offensive behavior also search for those who engage in mob mentality and hold them accountable when they try to find a job.
Re: How One Stupid Tweet Blew Up Justine Sacco’s Life
#495Earlier quoted context omitted.
Go on, tell us why gay marriage shouldn't be legal. To elaborate, you're implying there's a different, valid side to this argument. I'm curious to hear it.
I'm not religious, so I don't advocate for religious beliefs. I don't, however, deem people with non-violent religious beliefs, that differ from mine, to be "sociopaths".
This isn't a disagreement over optimal taxation rates. There are people committing suicide because they've been demonized by people like those Eich paid money to support. There is real harm being done.
Re: How One Stupid Tweet Blew Up Justine Sacco’s Life
#496Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not religious, so I don't advocate for religious beliefs. I don't, however, deem people with non-violent religious beliefs, that differ from mine, to be "sociopaths".
So you'd be okay with, say, banning bacon because Jews don't eat it? I'm not arguing against a religious belief. I'm arguing against a religious belief being enforced by the government. This isn't a disagreement over optimal taxation rates. There are people committing suicide because they've been demonized by people like those Eich paid money to support. There is real harm being done.
The only reason anyone knows about his ciews is because political donations are public, not because of anything he did at work.
Re: How One Stupid Tweet Blew Up Justine Sacco’s Life
#497Two things: Don't be too clever. People trip over themselves to feel offended. Two, you really don't have freedom of speech when you can get mugged by being obnoxious online. Not being malicious -just obnoxious. Yes all the tweets quoted in the article were obnoxious and leveraged stereotypes but I don't think people should be flogged for being like that. I remember all the obnoxious Polish jokes growing up. They wer…
> A robust society can take the jokes. Let me rephrase that: > A robust society requires everyone in the minority to shut the fuck up when anyone in the majority makes them feel invisible > An irony is that many of the people calling offense don't realize their own transgression in becoming part of a self-righteous mob meting out punishment at the speed of thought. There's a difference between pointing out someone ac…
Societies need to allow the free flow of ideas. We can't be choosy about what we consider proper or not, desirable and not. We have to allow everything.
I used to be a dreamer growing up and thought why not make these bad thoughts illegal, racism cured. No. That was naive. It has too many negative collateral consequences.
Re: How One Stupid Tweet Blew Up Justine Sacco’s Life
#498Earlier quoted context omitted.
My mistake, I should have been more clear. The current "political correctness" paradigm along with all of its associated hate mobs is a ferocious status competition as a result of the unmet sexual and pair-bonding needs of singles. Single males and females are different, in that females hold out for the absolute highest status man for as long as possible, whereas males try to poach any female who meets their minimum…
I did find your original comment interesting, but wasn't sure about its relevance to this article. This comment is more clarifying, thanks. I agree with your evopsych explanation. Political correctness is to do with status, as noted by Kristian at http://www.iea.org.uk/blog/the-economics-of-political-correc... but even he doesn't go so far as to connect it to sexual competition. Sexual competition, especially without…
"However, results of the study conclude that compared with "traditional families," parents of fragile families are more likely to have become parents in their teens, more likely to have had children with other partners, more likely to be poor, suffer from depression, struggle with substance abuse, and to have been incarcerated."
Aggregate crime may have decreased, but it is because we are still in the unraveling phase of widespread monogamy. Once its vestiges have fully eroded, then we will see the results.
1. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/lavar-young/children-out-of-we...
Re: How One Stupid Tweet Blew Up Justine Sacco’s Life
#499Re: How One Stupid Tweet Blew Up Justine Sacco’s Life
#500Earlier quoted context omitted.
He acknowledges that in the replies, but this particular "idiocy" is not one of tone, behavior, or offense. It is about bad technical policy in the pursuit of ego, which is something that Linus has done several times since. (And he's a brilliant enough kernel hacker that he can work around his own bad policy and still come up with a system that works well, but that doesn't mean it's not bad technical policy. I feel b…
It's funny you should mention that, as that episode from nearly 20 years ago (!!) has come up much more in the last year than it did in the two decades prior. Of course, the reason is not an accident; it's a direct result of those who vehemently disagree with my handling of the Noordhuis pronoun incident. Anyway, your request is entirely fair, and let me be clear that I (obviously?) regret the have-you-ever-kissed-a-…
"On the one hand, it seems ridiculous (absurd, perhaps) to fire someone over a pronoun -- but to characterize it that way would be a gross oversimplification: it's not the use of the gendered pronoun that's at issue (that's just sloppy), but rather the insistence that pronouns should in fact be gendered."
https://www.joyent.com/blog/the-power-of-a-pronoun
The biggest issue is the way that you handled this. You did this appallingly. You still seem to be puzzled why people still bring this up.
In a community project, people often do things you aren't going to like. Ben rejected a push, and he steadfastly maintains that he did this for good reasons:
https://github.com/joyent/libuv/pull/1015#issuecomment-29568...
Now instead of communicating with Ben, giving him the benefit of the doubt as a non-native speaker of English and calling him out publicly in the way you did was an absolute classic case of what you do NOT do.
In a community run project, the dynamics are different to being in a corporation. The first rule is: you are dealing with a lot of people, from a lot of different backgrounds. There is lots of room for misunderstanding. The absolute golden rule around dealing with a popular project is to try to wrangle this appropriately and with as little heat as possible.
So let's review what you did:
1. You posted one of the most inflammatory, aggressive posts I've seen in a very long time. You took no time to talk to Ben about his position and to talk him around to making an apology and reversing his decision.
2. You compete with StrongLoop. You basically told your competitor that they should fire one of their best developers to the project. Your company may have been a main initiator of Node.js and you see it as largely the steward for the project, but your own employee reversed the decision of a major contributor.
And this is where you really stuffed up. For some time there had been rumblings about how Joyent was biased about the way they accepted commits and directed the project - rightly or wrongly. There was a perception of bias towards Joyent's interests. That's not necessarily a correct viewpoint. But you started a chain of events you now can't control.
Joyent has finally setup a Foundation, but has now got a fork competing with the core project. StrongLoop is one of the groups backing io.js. A large number of your core developers are publicly backing io.js.
3. Community leaders, like yourself, aren't meant to send abusive messages over blogs. You called him an arsehole. You called for his sacking.
Let's underscore how tone-deaf you have been, and completely clueless over how to run an open source project:
"While we would fire Ben over this, node.js is an open source project and one doesn't necessarily have the same levers. Indeed, one of the challenges of an open source project that depends on volunteer effort is dealing with assholes"
You don't realise how much damage you did. I agree with gender neutral language in technical writing. Many others do as well. If you had dealt with this differently and not decided to become a self-aggrandizing pundit, then you would have probably shown that Joyent can deal with controversial matters maturely and civilly, play nicely with others, resolve conflict, and you'd have the high moral ground.
Now you just look like a bully, and I'd say you were the catalyst for the io.js fork. You also opened yourself up to your own past, which you also regret.
As I say - you've basically given us all a text-book case study into how not to manage an open source project.
P.S. FWIW, I upvoted you.