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

Public Apology to Jeremy Howard

numfocus.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 288 posts

Re: Public Apology to Jeremy Howard

#51

Post by part1of2 »

greenburger wrote: post #7
huhtenberg wrote: post #2

Well, who was responsible for this exactly? Given the circumstances, they should do better than an amorphous "we".

The letter was signed by the The NumFOCUS Code of Conduct Enforcement Committee. The members of that committee are listed on their code of conduct site. Seems pretty transparent to me. https://numfocus.org/code-of-conduct#persons-responsible

There's overlap with the people on that Committee and the Board of Directors, so the transparency isn't exactly their intention

Re: Public Apology to Jeremy Howard

#52

Post by marcinzm »

dagmx wrote: post #37
eznzt wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you need a CoC to get rid of someone who harasses others what you have is a deeper problem

How else would you codify what is and what isn't acceptable behaviour? Is it just arbitrary? Do you just depend on more people enforcing their views out to stop harassment? If so, then why not codify it?

As this whole debacles shows codifying doesn't remove arbitrary standards. Human social interactions are far too complex to codify in a concise way without massive edge cases. So all too often it just gives people a tool with which to better force their own arbitrary standards onto others.

Re: Public Apology to Jeremy Howard

#53

Post by Benjmhart »

rdtsc wrote: post #17

An interesting thing to think about is if they would apologize if this wasn't published in a blog and discussed online. Let's say Jeremy just walked away quietly in disgust and didn't say anything publicly. What would have they done? I would guess that they would have chucked it under "We did a great job enforcing the code of conduct. Problem solved".

Well, if nobody tells you you're being a shit, humans rarely realize it on their own, squeaky wheels get the grease.

Re: Public Apology to Jeremy Howard

#54

Post by mcguire »

greenburger wrote: post #7
huhtenberg wrote: post #2

Well, who was responsible for this exactly? Given the circumstances, they should do better than an amorphous "we".

The letter was signed by the The NumFOCUS Code of Conduct Enforcement Committee. The members of that committee are listed on their code of conduct site. Seems pretty transparent to me. https://numfocus.org/code-of-conduct#persons-responsible

NumFOCUS Code of Conduct Enforcement Team:

Leah Silen, Executive Director

Andy Terrel, President

Nicole Foster, Executive Operations Administrator

Walker Chabbott, Communications & Marketing Manager

NumFOCUS Board of Directors:

Andy Terrel

Lorena Barba

Jane Herriman

Sylvain Corlay

Katrina Riehl

Stéfan van der Walt

James Powell

I was wondering how much overlap there would be.

Re: Public Apology to Jeremy Howard

#55

Post by Alex3917 »

eznzt wrote: post #27
Xavdidtheshadow wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't mean this as an attack, but I'm guessing you haven't been harassed/given unwanted attention at a conference. It's easy to see codes of conduct as draconian or unnecessary if you can't empathize with the people they're designed to protect. I'm not saying the CoC system is perfect or that there aren't false positives, but your statement here is _dramatically_ privileged.

If you need a CoC to get rid of someone who harasses others what you have is a deeper problem

> If you need a CoC to get rid of someone who harasses others what you have is a deeper problem

How many conferences did you run before CoC's became popular?

Re: Public Apology to Jeremy Howard

#56

Post by mabbo »

GiorgioG wrote: post #3

I'm going to get downvoted for this, but: I'm against code of conducts because they're worse than the problems they try to solve. edit: In my opinion, code of conducts become a distraction and a cause for worry to anyone contributing to these projects because someone inevitably gets their feelings hurt and points to some well-intentioned rule in the CoC to get the 'offender' shamed/removed even if no harm was intende…

> In particular, I was concerned that if only partial information became available, the anti-CoC crowd might jump on this as an example of problems with codes of conduct more generally, or might point at this as part of “cancel culture” (a concept I vehemently disagree with, since what is referred to as “cancellation” is often just “facing consequences”).

I believe the author was referring to you.

Re: Public Apology to Jeremy Howard

#57

Post by notsuoh »

eznzt wrote: post #27
Xavdidtheshadow wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't mean this as an attack, but I'm guessing you haven't been harassed/given unwanted attention at a conference. It's easy to see codes of conduct as draconian or unnecessary if you can't empathize with the people they're designed to protect. I'm not saying the CoC system is perfect or that there aren't false positives, but your statement here is _dramatically_ privileged.

If you need a CoC to get rid of someone who harasses others what you have is a deeper problem

I think you're saying that people who harass should be able to be removed absent a code of conduct. I agree. However, harassment isn't always the overt act you may be picturing, it can be more subtle. Code of Conducts give a single canonical state for what's considered acceptable, but more importantly, give organizers something tangible to point to when there is a violation. In addition to that, they inform people (even the harassed, who may not have considered what's happening to them harassment!) of what I'd acceptable.

As a white, male engineer, I haven't ever found a need for codes of conduct because I've had the privilege of never having been harassed. This isn't the case for all groups, so it's best to have one.

Re: Public Apology to Jeremy Howard

#59

Post by [deleted] »

eznzt wrote: post #27
Xavdidtheshadow wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't mean this as an attack, but I'm guessing you haven't been harassed/given unwanted attention at a conference. It's easy to see codes of conduct as draconian or unnecessary if you can't empathize with the people they're designed to protect. I'm not saying the CoC system is perfect or that there aren't false positives, but your statement here is _dramatically_ privileged.

If you need a CoC to get rid of someone who harasses others what you have is a deeper problem

[deleted]

Re: Public Apology to Jeremy Howard

#60

Post by type0 »

GiorgioG wrote: post #3

I'm going to get downvoted for this, but: I'm against code of conducts because they're worse than the problems they try to solve. edit: In my opinion, code of conducts become a distraction and a cause for worry to anyone contributing to these projects because someone inevitably gets their feelings hurt and points to some well-intentioned rule in the CoC to get the 'offender' shamed/removed even if no harm was intende…

It's better to follow 10 commandments than any code of conduct

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ten_Commandments

Post reply on HN