I had the same experience with a mentor who was very experienced. He expected me to know things already and he was very unhelpful/mocking when I was not up to his standards. It was a really humiliating experience. I think the more people know, the more head strong they become. There are very few really knowledgeable people I know who remain as humble as you can expect.
I get why people post things like this, but I also sort of feel like I maybe never want to go to a software conference again. The atmosphere seems sort of menacing somehow. I certainly wouldn't speak at or help organize one.
Re: hesiod on the comments there - I don't know the man, but I have watched a video or two of him, and first heard of him on BSDNow. He sounded really smart and had some interesting things to say, but also did take direct swipes at everything Linux. They copied this, duped that, sucked at this... I did find it a bit grating, but not knowing how right or wrong he was, I just enjoyed the show.
To the main point: The title /is/ clickbaity; it feels like the writer was waiting for a good opportunity to take a swipe at Brian. I wouldn't skip out on a tech conference because someone I didn't like was there.
I have mixed feelings about this as someone who knows none of the players involved. On one hand, it does feel the like the author has felt genuine offense to publish such a lengthy attack. On the other hand, other than the main public evidence she offers, this blog post by Cantrill [0], which she describes as a "layer cake of vituperation and braggadocio, frosted with eloquence" -- I guess you just have had to have personal experience with Cantrill to get that vibe, because it seemed like a straightforward blog post to me.
Maybe the author doesn't want to drag Cantrill's name through the mud by posting private correspondence ("I watched him shame and insult hundreds of people, in public and in private, over email and in person, in papers and talks")...but for the author to end the essay as combatively as she does ("Come at me, Bryan"), I would've guessed that there would be damning material in Cantrill's other public correspondence, such as tweets.
It seems like Cantrill's personality, according to the author, is so irredeemable that the rest of the organizers and board for "Systems We Love" can't mitigate the effect. Is SWL organized in such a way that this is the case?
edit 2: This definitely rings a bell, though in this case, it's Cantrill being a jerk in arguing for non-gendered pronouns, something that I'm sure he got some criticism for: https://www.joyent.com/blog/the-power-of-a-pronoun
The world is full of jerks. What most adults do is ignore them. Valerie's post is unacceptable cyber-bullying in every sense. Are you are reasonable person? Assume so. Do you go around writing blog posts tearing down people who have wronged you in the past? I presume not. Valerie should be ashamed of her post...and what is more shameful is the brigading in her comments section.
I thought long and hard before posting this here for debate. Two people I deeply respect echoed the opinions in the post. In the end, I decided so because I am guilty of such behavior and I police myself to avoid it in settings where I feel a more careful approach is required.
Valerie's post is cyber-bullying. She should be ashamed of it. If a middle-school student wrote something like this about another student, they would be suspended.
Many of us have been wronged. Many of us have gripes with other adults. Very few of us commit to screeds like this as we understand there is nothing to be gained and the only result is a loss of the author's own dignity.
It is really unfathomable that Valerie appears to offer "inclusivity" consulting services yet writes something like this about another human being.
13 comments
[ 2.3 ms ] story [ 39.1 ms ] threadhe is mean and thinks he's better than me, so I don't like him and I don't think anyone else should like him either
To the main point: The title /is/ clickbaity; it feels like the writer was waiting for a good opportunity to take a swipe at Brian. I wouldn't skip out on a tech conference because someone I didn't like was there.
Maybe the author doesn't want to drag Cantrill's name through the mud by posting private correspondence ("I watched him shame and insult hundreds of people, in public and in private, over email and in person, in papers and talks")...but for the author to end the essay as combatively as she does ("Come at me, Bryan"), I would've guessed that there would be damning material in Cantrill's other public correspondence, such as tweets.
It seems like Cantrill's personality, according to the author, is so irredeemable that the rest of the organizers and board for "Systems We Love" can't mitigate the effect. Is SWL organized in such a way that this is the case?
[0] https://www.joyent.com/blog/systems-we-love
edit: OK, this from 20 years ago rings a bell (the HN discussion at least): https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9039884
edit 2: This definitely rings a bell, though in this case, it's Cantrill being a jerk in arguing for non-gendered pronouns, something that I'm sure he got some criticism for: https://www.joyent.com/blog/the-power-of-a-pronoun
Many of us have been wronged. Many of us have gripes with other adults. Very few of us commit to screeds like this as we understand there is nothing to be gained and the only result is a loss of the author's own dignity.
It is really unfathomable that Valerie appears to offer "inclusivity" consulting services yet writes something like this about another human being.