Indeed, what perfect poetic irony - Peter was certainly hoisted by his own petard. You'd think that he'd be aware of the CoC looming over him in conversations given his familiarity with it but I guess he was too short-sighted.
As far as CoCs provide for banning/muting obnoxious jerks (which is always going to be a subjective call), I'm for it, but surely there needs to be an escalating set of disciplinary steps - hard to see anything in here supporting more than a thirty day suspension.
On the other hand, an author of the CoC should hold themself to a higher standard than "I wrote it, so everyone who disagrees is wrong".
I don't know who any of these people are, but if that guy acts like that often, I'm glad he's been banned. I _hate_ when people dismiss questions as simply invalid without any explanation as to why it's invalid. How does that help anything? What are you even doing on a golang slack if you're just going to "troll" people for asking questions about golang?
Yup, the inquiring user was pointing out a very confusing situation in the Go stdlib wrt. the handling of time, and also doing so in a very kind and reasonable way. Even if the documentation was technically accurate, the very fact that this kind of confusion can arise wrt. such a technical topic is a serious defect. The guy's reply is seriously unprofessional, and it's good that the golang folks are very clearly distancing themselves and disclaiming any endorsement of this kind of behavior.
Perhaps it's just because I'm not American, but I do find both positions (Peter's and Tim's, the author of the Report) a bit childish. I do think it's like "Hey teacher, Joe is bothering me!", and I have watched enough American movies to know that the American answer is "You both go to the Director's office now! Parents come later and blah blah, one of the kids is expelled and the other kid is now target of bullying by other bastard kids". Well, at least in great part of Europe and Asia the answer usually is "You two little bastards stop now!" and the whole class just turns to the two little kids waiting for them to stop the scene. The two kids realised the shame and stop.
But perhaps I'm wrong and the report written by Tim is the way to go.
> at least in great part of Europe and Asia [...] The two kids realised the shame and stop.
Unfortunately, over the internet, kids and adults from all around the world usually refuse to stop trolling and harassing; they will even brag about their disruptive behaviour, if they think they can get away with it. This is why CoCs and bans have proliferated, and rightfully so.
So, based on the negatives I got I say: if I offended you, sorry; that wasn't my intention. As someone said once to me: "You have a thick skin, Sven!".
Other guy was just trying to understand how something works and troll activates enourmous passive aggressive defense mechanism because he doesn’t like being disagreed with
Someone should ban Linus Torvalds then. C'mon we are adults: we resolve things by talking, not by calling the @admins.
And based on the imgur you posted, I think it all started with Tim's message at 11:00 am (just after Peter's message at 10:58 am): Peter got "clicked" by Tim.
At least Torvalds doesn’t waste people’s’ time and just tells them to fuck off. That’s not good, but better than the shitty childish behavior in that slack. And while I think no one should be mean to anyone in general, chances are if you’re incessantly arguing with Torvalds about something Linux, youre wrong
There was no talking or discussion. It was one person being mean spirited and childish for their own amusement at the expense of others. At some point in this thread you defend it as some sort of American cultural thing -- it's not. It's universal to be respectful to others.
You're not at a bar, you're not with your friends. Don't Be a Dick. A lot of us grew up in IRC, and this behavior existed then, but hey, you're not anonymous anymore. The world / internet has moved on. Follow along (or face the consequences. I wouldn't work with Peter if you doubled my salary. I would actively avoid Peter in any technical setting).
What seemed to trigger Peter is someone who knows something much much more deeply than he does. He tried to initially engage, and quickly found himself out of his depth, and reverted to being childish. This is why you wouldn't want to work with Peter. That level of insecurity is taxing on a team.
Funny. People being childish and mean spirited for their own petty complexes is how I would describe the response. They couldn't just let it slide. The idea that intent doesn't matter, and the most hysterical reaction should be validated, is a recipe for feedback loops of drama and cluster B.
Who raised these children? How do they function in the real world, if their response to some snark is to set up a massive campaign to discredit the person responsible and ban them from a community? This is a whole kitchen of pots calling the kettle black.
Luckily this is only about Go. It could've been about a programming language with a future, taste or any good ideas whatsoever. That would've been a shame.
Geez I feel bad for the guy asking the question... it was an interesting topic and he was basically ignored. I was expecting better from an "official" Slack.
I don't see why the guy was banned. It wasn't that bad, I expected a lot worse. To me, it just seemed like he was being a little silly, maybe trying to put a little levity in the conversation.
Additionally, I think bans should be quiet. This really sucks that he was called out and it seems like it is being published everywhere, and could effect his livelihood. It's like on reddit, that guy who was a teacher and was an expert on crows and ravens and such. His name was known. And he got called out for "cheating" which means that he had an alternate account to upvote his original comments. Yet when reddit started, the founders did the exact same thing. But, that is beside the point. They could have just sent a private message to him and let him know that he couldn't post anymore. Or just a warning. As he was one of the most well-known people on reddit at that time. But they accused him of cheating and that couldn't help his career. I know there's the whole argument that you have to watch your words, but this call-out culture sucks, and doesn't allow room for anyone to make a mistake, and as a result, can wreck careers and income. And, to me, it was especially bad on the reddit case, because everyone else is completely anonymous on reddit and can say what they want and not be known, but he was actually trying to add to the conversation, and did, substantially. Except for that one time. Everyone loved the guy.
Oh well. Sign of the times, I guess.
The solution, of course, is to create your own community, and write your own code of conduct.
I worked at the same company as the banned individual (Peter) some years ago. We were even on the same team for a time. Smart guy, but his caustic snark and condescension frankly overshadowed the technical and organizational impact of his work. I got a distinct sense of an unhealthy degree of hipster vanity for a lack of a better way of framing it. I have no axe to grind, but I'd have thought twice about hiring him for a team I was running (no place for toxicity in the workplace).
To this specific incident here, I'm a bit taken aback by the level of immaturity documented in the writeup, as even this seems beneath what I observed from him in the workplace. Nevertheless, his poor attitude makes the episode seem plausible.
A dose of humility would benefit him. And believe me, I don't like writing any of the above.
> I'm a bit taken aback by the level of immaturity documented in the writeup, as even this seems beneath what I observed from him in the workplace.
On the Internet there are no social cues or biological processes between you and the recipient of your words. That's why in this case he's coming across as more immature than what you're experienced in the work place.
The CoC says not to make people feel unwelcome, yet they still have a banner on the golang homepage supporting what I consider to be a racist terrorist oranisation. I feel pretty unwelcome. I thought it was a programming language, not marxist political movement. Imagine going on the kkk website (if there is one) and it's got a banner about how Rust is memory safe and you should get involved. lol
28 comments
[ 3.5 ms ] story [ 33.6 ms ] threadOn the other hand, an author of the CoC should hold themself to a higher standard than "I wrote it, so everyone who disagrees is wrong".
But perhaps I'm wrong and the report written by Tim is the way to go.
Unfortunately, over the internet, kids and adults from all around the world usually refuse to stop trolling and harassing; they will even brag about their disruptive behaviour, if they think they can get away with it. This is why CoCs and bans have proliferated, and rightfully so.
Most adults are reasonable enough not to pick on others even when they've been bullied, and the ones that do, the Go team doesn't want them.
https://imgur.com/a/yPnWGXp?utm_source=thenewstack&utm_mediu...
Other guy was just trying to understand how something works and troll activates enourmous passive aggressive defense mechanism because he doesn’t like being disagreed with
And based on the imgur you posted, I think it all started with Tim's message at 11:00 am (just after Peter's message at 10:58 am): Peter got "clicked" by Tim.
You're not at a bar, you're not with your friends. Don't Be a Dick. A lot of us grew up in IRC, and this behavior existed then, but hey, you're not anonymous anymore. The world / internet has moved on. Follow along (or face the consequences. I wouldn't work with Peter if you doubled my salary. I would actively avoid Peter in any technical setting).
What seemed to trigger Peter is someone who knows something much much more deeply than he does. He tried to initially engage, and quickly found himself out of his depth, and reverted to being childish. This is why you wouldn't want to work with Peter. That level of insecurity is taxing on a team.
Who raised these children? How do they function in the real world, if their response to some snark is to set up a massive campaign to discredit the person responsible and ban them from a community? This is a whole kitchen of pots calling the kettle black.
Luckily this is only about Go. It could've been about a programming language with a future, taste or any good ideas whatsoever. That would've been a shame.
Rightly so by looking at this “conversation”.
Additionally, I think bans should be quiet. This really sucks that he was called out and it seems like it is being published everywhere, and could effect his livelihood. It's like on reddit, that guy who was a teacher and was an expert on crows and ravens and such. His name was known. And he got called out for "cheating" which means that he had an alternate account to upvote his original comments. Yet when reddit started, the founders did the exact same thing. But, that is beside the point. They could have just sent a private message to him and let him know that he couldn't post anymore. Or just a warning. As he was one of the most well-known people on reddit at that time. But they accused him of cheating and that couldn't help his career. I know there's the whole argument that you have to watch your words, but this call-out culture sucks, and doesn't allow room for anyone to make a mistake, and as a result, can wreck careers and income. And, to me, it was especially bad on the reddit case, because everyone else is completely anonymous on reddit and can say what they want and not be known, but he was actually trying to add to the conversation, and did, substantially. Except for that one time. Everyone loved the guy.
Oh well. Sign of the times, I guess.
The solution, of course, is to create your own community, and write your own code of conduct.
To this specific incident here, I'm a bit taken aback by the level of immaturity documented in the writeup, as even this seems beneath what I observed from him in the workplace. Nevertheless, his poor attitude makes the episode seem plausible.
A dose of humility would benefit him. And believe me, I don't like writing any of the above.
> And believe me, I don't like writing any of the above.
Yeah, right.
On the Internet there are no social cues or biological processes between you and the recipient of your words. That's why in this case he's coming across as more immature than what you're experienced in the work place.
The way Peter behaved and continue to behave on Twitter is classic case of cyberbulling!!