3 ms·

Does "we respect Ward Cunningham" mean we should sit silently when we disagree with his decision or not? It's either yes or no and speaking of autonomous adult

by dpark 10y ago

Does "we respect Ward Cunningham" mean we should sit silently when we disagree with his decision or not? It's either yes or no and speaking of autonomous adults and smart things doesn't change that. Either respect means we shut up when we disagree or it doesn't. You can't claim that respect doesn't mean we should shut up and then claim that we should shut up in this case ... because of our respect for Ward Cunningham. And I'd like to be super clear that Ward Cunningham doesn't owe me anything and if he wants to turn off his wiki and burn the archives that's his business and I actually don't care too much and I wish him all the best regardless. What I don't like is this frequent assertion that criticizing someone's actions implies a lack of respect, or conversely that respect implies silence in the face of disagreement.

wpietri 10y ago
You are making a complicated thing into a binary. I'm sure that feels pleasantly dramatic, but it confuses issues where we need clarity. If you complain in a way that you are setting yourself up as judge and jury (a common mode here on HN), then yes, I'd rather you put a sock in it. Ward's a smart guy, he knows more about the topic than you, and he's spent much more time thinking about it. Truly respecting that eliminates certain kinds of critique. Note that this doesn't stop you from commenting. If you would like to mention your feelings in non-judgmental ways, that's fine. E.g., "I'm worried: what will happen to the archives?" Or "I don't understand how he will solve problem X." It also doesn't prevent you from expressing different values, as long as you respect his values. But you are only competent to disagree with his decision once you have as much information as he does and has put a similar level of thought into it. Otherwise you're one of those people who froths at a trial outcome without actually looking at the trial record and carefully reading the judge's decision. Not all opinions are equally valuable. If I suggest my ignorant opinion is just as good as somebody else's informed one, I am unavoidably being disrespectful to them.
- dpark 10y ago
  > You are making a complicated thing into a binary. I'm sure that feels pleasantly dramatic, but it confuses issues where we need clarity. I'm happy to recognize the middle ground where someone can effectively just be whining and have nothing useful to say, and the appropriate thing to do is just shut up. That middle ground has nothing to do with respect though, which gets back to my point. Certainly I agree that the way a concern is voiced has a major impact on how it will be received. > But you are only competent to disagree with his decision once you have as much information as he does and has put a similar level of thought into it. Otherwise you're one of those people who froths at a trial outcome without actually looking at the trial record and carefully reading the judge's decision. Not all opinions are equally valuable. If I suggest my ignorant opinion is just as good as somebody else's informed one, I am unavoidably being disrespectful to them. Absolutely not. This is a terribly unhealthy attitude. By this logic, you can virtually never question someone's choice because you effectively never know everything that goes into someone else's choice. This is yes man logic that leads to an echo chamber. Less charitably, this is apologist behavior. This is the argument put forward to defend every shady government decision in history. "Oh, you don't have all the information so you can't have an opinion on the issue." What you should be doing in a situation where you disagree but don't feel well informed is to become well informed so that you can either defend your position or understand the decision.
  - inimino 10y ago
    > apologist behavior Going a bit off the deep end here. When you disagree but don't feel well informed, often the best thing to do is move on. There is little value in maintaining positions that don't directly bear on future actions you will personally take. Sometimes it's not even about being well informed, it's about having another ten years of experience. Respect is recognizing the gap between you and the one making the decision. Respect doesn't just mean shutting up, it can mean changing your perspective or changing the weight you give to your own opinion.
    - dpark 10y ago
      > Going a bit off the deep end here. No, I provided a concrete example of why the attitude is unhealthy. There are many other examples, but I picked a simple one. I assumed that it would illuminate the core point, and failed to recognize that it provided an easy way to ignore the point and criticize the example. > When you disagree but don't feel well informed, often the best thing to do is move on. There is little value in maintaining positions that don't directly bear on future actions you will personally take. Is ignorance really its own justification for continued ignorance? If you disagree but don't care, the best thing is often to move on. If you disagree but care, and you're uninformed, you should become informed. > Sometimes it's not even about being well informed, it's about having another ten years of experience. > Respect is recognizing the gap between you and the one making the decision. > Respect doesn't just mean shutting up, it can mean changing your perspective or changing the weight you give to your own opinion. Respect is caring enough to give measured criticism. Respect is knowing that they can handle the truth. Respect is wanting to learn what they know. (Are we done with platitudes now?)
      - inimino 10y ago
        Learning has a cost, and you can't be informed about everything. Sometimes when you disagree but care the best thing is actually to stop caring. This is why your example about governments is off-point, by the way.
  - wpietri 10y ago

by dpark 10y ago

wpietri 10y ago

You are making a complicated thing into a binary. I'm sure that feels pleasantly dramatic, but it confuses issues where we need clarity. If you complain in a way that you are setting yourself up as judge and jury (a common mode here on HN), then yes, I'd rather you put a sock in it. Ward's a smart guy, he knows more about the topic than you, and he's spent much more time thinking about it. Truly respecting that eliminates certain kinds of critique. Note that this doesn't stop you from commenting. If you would like to mention your feelings in non-judgmental ways, that's fine. E.g., "I'm worried: what will happen to the archives?" Or "I don't understand how he will solve problem X." It also doesn't prevent you from expressing different values, as long as you respect his values. But you are only competent to disagree with his decision once you have as much information as he does and has put a similar level of thought into it. Otherwise you're one of those people who froths at a trial outcome without actually looking at the trial record and carefully reading the judge's decision. Not all opinions are equally valuable. If I suggest my ignorant opinion is just as good as somebody else's informed one, I am unavoidably being disrespectful to them.

dpark 10y ago
> You are making a complicated thing into a binary. I'm sure that feels pleasantly dramatic, but it confuses issues where we need clarity. I'm happy to recognize the middle ground where someone can effectively just be whining and have nothing useful to say, and the appropriate thing to do is just shut up. That middle ground has nothing to do with respect though, which gets back to my point. Certainly I agree that the way a concern is voiced has a major impact on how it will be received. > But you are only competent to disagree with his decision once you have as much information as he does and has put a similar level of thought into it. Otherwise you're one of those people who froths at a trial outcome without actually looking at the trial record and carefully reading the judge's decision. Not all opinions are equally valuable. If I suggest my ignorant opinion is just as good as somebody else's informed one, I am unavoidably being disrespectful to them. Absolutely not. This is a terribly unhealthy attitude. By this logic, you can virtually never question someone's choice because you effectively never know everything that goes into someone else's choice. This is yes man logic that leads to an echo chamber. Less charitably, this is apologist behavior. This is the argument put forward to defend every shady government decision in history. "Oh, you don't have all the information so you can't have an opinion on the issue." What you should be doing in a situation where you disagree but don't feel well informed is to become well informed so that you can either defend your position or understand the decision.
- inimino 10y ago
  > apologist behavior Going a bit off the deep end here. When you disagree but don't feel well informed, often the best thing to do is move on. There is little value in maintaining positions that don't directly bear on future actions you will personally take. Sometimes it's not even about being well informed, it's about having another ten years of experience. Respect is recognizing the gap between you and the one making the decision. Respect doesn't just mean shutting up, it can mean changing your perspective or changing the weight you give to your own opinion.
  - dpark 10y ago
    > Going a bit off the deep end here. No, I provided a concrete example of why the attitude is unhealthy. There are many other examples, but I picked a simple one. I assumed that it would illuminate the core point, and failed to recognize that it provided an easy way to ignore the point and criticize the example. > When you disagree but don't feel well informed, often the best thing to do is move on. There is little value in maintaining positions that don't directly bear on future actions you will personally take. Is ignorance really its own justification for continued ignorance? If you disagree but don't care, the best thing is often to move on. If you disagree but care, and you're uninformed, you should become informed. > Sometimes it's not even about being well informed, it's about having another ten years of experience. > Respect is recognizing the gap between you and the one making the decision. > Respect doesn't just mean shutting up, it can mean changing your perspective or changing the weight you give to your own opinion. Respect is caring enough to give measured criticism. Respect is knowing that they can handle the truth. Respect is wanting to learn what they know. (Are we done with platitudes now?)
    - inimino 10y ago
      Learning has a cost, and you can't be informed about everything. Sometimes when you disagree but care the best thing is actually to stop caring. This is why your example about governments is off-point, by the way.
- wpietri 10y ago