51–60 of 76 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I have found they are literally 2x-10x better than their peers. So either your organisation is horribly sexist by not promoting these women or you are horribly sexist and think they are better because they are women.
Those are the only two options?
Do you have another reason a developer 10x better than her peers isn’t promoted to senior, to principal, etc?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> This is a bizarre claim. People getting labeled as "diversity hires" and being assumed to be less competent than their peers is a decades-old thing. The truth is that it kind of doesn't matter if it's new or not, it's a very hot subject right now and people are touchy about it. I understand why; Women are facing a lot of abuse on the internet and it feels like many are coming forward with icky things that people ha…
Are you claiming that you couldn’t find any woman who was qualified for your project?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
As a non-native English speaker, I am always thrown off by the word terrific . It sounds horrible to me, and apparently it can also mean very bad . https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/terrific
I don't remember hearing it used in that way before; I think you would have to go back a couple of centuries for that usage. You can be confident that you won't need that definition in your own usage unless you decide to write an 18th century character or something. To add to the etymology links (I was also intrigued): https://www.grammarphobia.com/blog/2013/08/terror-terrific.h...
https://genius.com/Herbert-morrison-hindenburg-disaster-broa...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> This is a bizarre claim. People getting labeled as "diversity hires" and being assumed to be less competent than their peers is a decades-old thing. The truth is that it kind of doesn't matter if it's new or not, it's a very hot subject right now and people are touchy about it. I understand why; Women are facing a lot of abuse on the internet and it feels like many are coming forward with icky things that people ha…
Are you claiming that you couldn’t find any woman who was qualified for your project?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> This is a bizarre claim. People getting labeled as "diversity hires" and being assumed to be less competent than their peers is a decades-old thing. The truth is that it kind of doesn't matter if it's new or not, it's a very hot subject right now and people are touchy about it. I understand why; Women are facing a lot of abuse on the internet and it feels like many are coming forward with icky things that people ha…
Are you claiming that you couldn’t find any woman who was qualified for your project?
I live in a third city in Sweden, in a slice of time that the company needed to find someone and we do not pay competitive wages.
I’m sure we could find someone qualified eventually and if we paid enough, and we have had good female candidates at other times albeit for different roles than this one, however they didn’t want to relocate.
Context being what it is, it takes us roughly 2 years to hire a new person to our team because people don’t want to live where we are or accept the rates we pay.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Surely the weirder thing is to see, for example, a dozen member board for a global corporation where every single member is a middle aged white guy? Or an outfit where everybody in the C-suite went to the same school. Like, it's not quite as astonishing as a "government committee on women's health" in which every single member is a man, but it's getting up there. Diversity is an attribute you want unless you've got s…
> It stands to reason that there are going to be women (in particular) with the innate abilities you want Since when was hiring about innate abilities? > if you hire based on what people already did, not what you assess they can do in the future That’s literally how the majority of tech companies both hire and promote. Good luck getting a promotion at Google (for example) based on potential.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Those are the only two options?
> Those are the only two options? Do you have another reason a developer 10x better than her peers isn’t promoted to senior, to principal, etc?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> In case you wonder, they are not random people put there for reasons, like for example since Madelyn is a woman so there was some pressure to add she Kind of a strange thing to call out.
These are the times we live in. Thanks to widespread racist/sexist hiring practices, every time I see a woman or minority in an upper level position I can’t help but wonder if they are there because someone wanted to fill a diversity quota. The thought never even crossed my mind 10 years ago.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> In case you wonder, they are not random people put there for reasons, like for example since Madelyn is a woman so there was some pressure to add she Kind of a strange thing to call out.
I'm pretty sure Antirez doesn't mean it the way you're interpreting it. Just like me, he's not a native English speaker. I believe what he means is that she has NOT been chosen simply because she's a woman, but because of her skills.
Both Madelyn and Zhao are terrific programmers. In case you wonder, they are not random people put there for reasons, like for example since Madelyn is a woman so there was some pressure to add she. She deserves this 100% and is one of the top Redis contributors of the last times, with deep technical knowledge in basically every aspect of Redis. The same for Zhao, he is simply impressive, can track bugs about complex…