On the sickness of our community

Posted Oct 22, 2014 14:58 UTC (Wed) by bronson (subscriber, #4806)
In reply to: On the sickness of our community by dlang
Parent article: On the sickness of our community

Here's the definition I'm using, from Merriam-Webster:

"a person who strongly and unfairly dislikes other people, ideas, etc. : a bigoted person; especially : a person who hates or refuses to accept the members of a particular group (such as a racial or religious group)"

What definition are you using?

to post comments

On the sickness of our community

Posted Oct 22, 2014 23:22 UTC (Wed) by dlang (guest, #313) [Link] (6 responses)

Well, it all depends on what you call "unfairly" doesn't it?

Calling for someone to be fired because of how they voted is only unfair if what they voted for is something you approved of, right? Otherwise they are only getting what they deserve for being such horrible people (never mind how they act in person, how good they are at doing their job, or anything else like that)

On the sickness of our community

Posted Oct 23, 2014 6:53 UTC (Thu) by Cyberax (✭ supporter ✭, #52523) [Link]

"I don't want to work with Lennart or use his software because he speaks German" is a valid political statement (if a little bizarre). You don't even need to justify it.

It's also OK to use it to bar systemd from entering a distribution that you manage or to convince other maintainers to reject it. Nothing wrong with it.

On the sickness of our community

Posted Oct 23, 2014 16:52 UTC (Thu) by bronson (subscriber, #4806) [Link] (4 responses)

No, it depends on what society and the courts call unfair. And history: many respectable American citizens from the 1860s are rightfully seen as bigots when viewed from 1960s.

If you're actively discriminating against the human beings your workers have chosen as life partners, then you can't possibly lead those workers can you? Eich could have clarified his position to be compatible with those of his employees and his company, yet he refused to do so. He made a fine CTO but wasn't a good candidate to be Mozilla's CEO. Alas.

On the sickness of our community

Posted Oct 31, 2014 18:54 UTC (Fri) by blujay (guest, #39961) [Link] (3 responses)

> No, it depends on what society and the courts call unfair. And history: many respectable American citizens from the 1860s are rightfully seen as bigots when viewed from 1960s.

I honestly see you as a bigot:

> If you're actively discriminating against the human beings your workers have chosen as life partners, then you can't possibly lead those workers can you?

You're unfairly discriminating against people in the workplace because of their personal, political opinions. This makes you a bigot and a hypocrite.

> Eich could have clarified his position to be compatible with those of his employees and his company, yet he refused to do so.

That is a lie. He repeatedly stated that he treated everyone the same in the workplace, and more importantly, his track record demonstrated the truth of that statement. Other Mozillians confirmed it as well.

> He made a fine CTO but wasn't a good candidate to be Mozilla's CEO. Alas.

Yes, too bad for him that he refused to cave on his principles. Silly boy didn't realize that there is no private life in the USSA. If only he had toed the party line, he would have been tolerated. Oh well, at least the rest of us are safe from his dangerous ideologies now that he's been purged. Thank glorious leader for his wisdom in protecting us!

On the sickness of our community

Posted Oct 31, 2014 20:08 UTC (Fri) by Cyberax (✭ supporter ✭, #52523) [Link] (2 responses)

> You're unfairly discriminating against people in the workplace because of their personal, political opinions. This makes you a bigot and a hypocrite.
CEOs in the US have amazing power to discriminate based on personal or political opinions. For example, it's totally legal for a CEO in most states to walk down the parking lot and fire everybody with an Obama sticker on their car.

So I think it's fair that the same attitude applies to the CEOs themselves.

On the sickness of our community

Posted Nov 1, 2014 18:13 UTC (Sat) by blujay (guest, #39961) [Link] (1 responses)

Interestingly, you didn't deny that you are discriminating against him. It's convenient when the person with whom you vehemently disagree is in a prominent position and you can use that as an excuse to persecute him.

But it's no less wrong to do so. It's opportunistic hypocrisy. It demonstrates that you are not guided by any principles of righteousness, justice, or liberty, but will merely do whatever is convenient to further your agenda, even if it means contradicting yourself and violating another person's freedoms.

History has truly shown that such attitudes lead to and are part of oppression, fascism, and mob rule--truly on the wrong side of history. Utterly shameful.

What goes around comes around. However, most narcissists can't see past their own lifetimes, and wouldn't care if they could. So if they drive the bus over a cliff, it's fine, because they'll die of natural causes before the bus hits the ground--because it's a long, long way down. Then it's not their problem anymore.

On the sickness of our community

Posted Nov 1, 2014 22:15 UTC (Sat) by Cyberax (✭ supporter ✭, #52523) [Link]

'Discriminate'? Nope. He has exactly the same rights as everybody else.

For example: "The right to be fired without any reason for political beliefs".