5 ms·

You sound like you're either management or the kind of person who's first to cross picket lines. Anyhow, take out the vitriol and your statement is basically "

You sound like you're either management or the kind of person who's first to cross picket lines. Anyhow, take out the vitriol and your statement is basically "do you realize that you're supporting the quality of life of software developers?" Yes. Yes I am. I'm a software developer and this stuff is important. I'm opposed to moving towards a negotiated position that gives employers more at the expense of software developers. These are not unreasonable positions to hold. editing to add in a quote from parent downthread: >yes, I was in some mid-management level Keep that in mind as you read comments.

ryanwaggoner 10y ago
Responding with an ad hominem attack, nice. You see your position as supporting software developers, which is reasonable. It's not reasonable to expect other software developers to refuse to raise rational points of inquiry that you've based your argument on because it may result in weakening your argument on the merits. It demonstrates that you care more about winning than about the truth. As a result, you're responding to someone who is behaving more rationally than you with an emotional response and personal attacks.
- johansch 10y ago
  Thanks, that was a lot more eloquent and expressive than what I would have managed. But, yeah, I meant the same thing.
- ThrustVectoring 10y ago
  This is the sort of bare-bones level of thinking about the consequences of your actions that I expect out of professionals and adults. The lady in the grocery store may be fat, but loudly talking about that true fact is the sort of thing that we teach our children not to do. I'm not expecting us to not discuss these things; I'm expecting us to not discuss them in a way that hurts us as a class. Keep it over the water cooler, or on private mailing lists. As far as the ad hominem goes - that's the appropriate response to the social status implications of the "easy hipster" comment.
  - johansch 10y ago
    Regarding the "easy hipster" part - I exaggerated for effect. That is the perception people have on SV developers, for right or wrong. Meanwhile, I'm from Sweden so I'm perhaps just an outside observer to this spectacle.. but at least from my perspective, SV developers are generally speaking overpaid. Well, at least compared to Swedish/European developers. :)
    - ThrustVectoring 10y ago
      I suspect that your belief that SV developers are overpaid is because of targeted media with the goal of underpaying developers outside of Silicon Valley. If you're reading it, it's for you.
      - johansch 10y ago
        No, it's more the fact that I have been involved in hiring rounds in SV and seen the insane amounts relatively speaking crappy devs are demanding.
        ThrustVectoring 10y ago
        Your deleted comment form elsewhere in the thread: >Well, at the moment I'm (possibly temporarily) retired, doing hobby projects. I have never felt the urge to cross any picket lines. Not mentioning that you're former management is extremely dishonest. Derailing pro-worker discussions like this with condescension and dishonesty is extraordinarily unethical.
        johansch 10y ago
        Let me just point out that you just commented to a comment where I said I had been involved in hiring. And yes, I was in some mid-management level. But I was foremost a developer.
        ryanwaggoner 10y ago
        Oh please, that's ridiculous. "Pro-worker discussion"? "Former management?" This bizarre class warfare / labor vs. management thing you have going on is so over the top it's ridiculous. This isn't a garment sweatshop in the 1800s. Even if the person you're responding to on some internet forum is the president of the Foundation For Keeping Software Developers from Being Overpaid, it's not unethical for them to jump into a discussion on the merits without disclosing that fact. Why are you so afraid of having a frank discussion about this, with anyone? Slinging around terms like "extraordinarily unethical" when they're not even remotely warranted just makes it seem like you have little faith that your position makes any rational sense.
- gingerrr 10y ago
  I'd take issue with your claim that the response by GP was the first emotional or attacking blow - that response was to GGP's "easy hipster life" claim, and the implicit claim therein that GP's call for labor solidarity was spoiled whining rather than, perhaps, a call for skilled workers in an industry to support each other's negotiation positions rather than undercut each other. > It's not reasonable to expect other software developers to refuse to raise rational points of inquiry that you've based your argument on because it may result in weakening your argument on the merits. What argument are you claiming is weakened? GP is saying that our overall, industry-wide labor bargaining position is weakened when a subset of us willingly take suboptimal work-hour or payment arrangements - really they're giving the companies and hiring side of the discussions all of the leverage over us while dropping our price floor out from under us. If that sort of thing continues, it signals to the market that we are not skilled labor, just labor. And then all the software jobs run overseas where they are cheaper, just like manufacturing has done over the last 50 years (and software has already begun to). Maybe the original comment GP's response to wasn't the right one - but it's the right sentiment in this discussion of whether work-life balance is a good thing. How is that even a question?
  - ThrustVectoring 10y ago
    My biggest beef is that it's undermining a set of strategies for playing office politics. It's in my best interest to enforce boundaries on work-life balance. It's also in my best interest to talk about enforcing those boundaries in terms of what the company wants, rather than what I want.
    - gingerrr 10y ago
      That last point is a great one I hadn't considered. Framing work-life balance as a business need is the only tenable bargaining position we will continue to have. Thanks for the clarification.
  - ryanwaggoner 10y ago
    What argument are you claiming is weakened? I'm not saying any argument is weakened. This is analogous to what I saw: 1. Article claims X, which is good for software devs as a whole. 2. Software dev #1 says "Hmm...is X even true? Doesn't make sense for reasons A, B, and C." 3. Software dev #2 says "Hey, we're trying to negotiate here and it doesn't matter if X is true or not. You shouldn't even be pointing out that it might not be true and that we should have more evidence. You're a traitor!" Sorry, but I have a lot more respect for software dev #1's position than software dev #2's position. I want to be associated with a community of people who are looking for the truth, even if it leads them somewhere difficult, not protecting themselves at the expense of others, truth be damned. And I certainly don't want to be associated with a group that not only doesn't want the truth, but yells at anyone within that group who dares to challenge the consensus. Ugh.
- vibrato 10y ago
  An attack on character isn't necessarily an ad hominem fallacy. The poster engaged directly with the argument, and didn't rely on the character attack to make his argument.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]

ryanwaggoner 10y ago

Responding with an ad hominem attack, nice. You see your position as supporting software developers, which is reasonable. It's not reasonable to expect other software developers to refuse to raise rational points of inquiry that you've based your argument on because it may result in weakening your argument on the merits. It demonstrates that you care more about winning than about the truth. As a result, you're responding to someone who is behaving more rationally than you with an emotional response and personal attacks.

johansch 10y ago
Thanks, that was a lot more eloquent and expressive than what I would have managed. But, yeah, I meant the same thing.
ThrustVectoring 10y ago
This is the sort of bare-bones level of thinking about the consequences of your actions that I expect out of professionals and adults. The lady in the grocery store may be fat, but loudly talking about that true fact is the sort of thing that we teach our children not to do. I'm not expecting us to not discuss these things; I'm expecting us to not discuss them in a way that hurts us as a class. Keep it over the water cooler, or on private mailing lists. As far as the ad hominem goes - that's the appropriate response to the social status implications of the "easy hipster" comment.
- johansch 10y ago
  Regarding the "easy hipster" part - I exaggerated for effect. That is the perception people have on SV developers, for right or wrong. Meanwhile, I'm from Sweden so I'm perhaps just an outside observer to this spectacle.. but at least from my perspective, SV developers are generally speaking overpaid. Well, at least compared to Swedish/European developers. :)
  - ThrustVectoring 10y ago
    I suspect that your belief that SV developers are overpaid is because of targeted media with the goal of underpaying developers outside of Silicon Valley. If you're reading it, it's for you.
    - johansch 10y ago
      No, it's more the fact that I have been involved in hiring rounds in SV and seen the insane amounts relatively speaking crappy devs are demanding.
      - ThrustVectoring 10y ago
        Your deleted comment form elsewhere in the thread: >Well, at the moment I'm (possibly temporarily) retired, doing hobby projects. I have never felt the urge to cross any picket lines. Not mentioning that you're former management is extremely dishonest. Derailing pro-worker discussions like this with condescension and dishonesty is extraordinarily unethical.
        johansch 10y ago
        Let me just point out that you just commented to a comment where I said I had been involved in hiring. And yes, I was in some mid-management level. But I was foremost a developer.
        ryanwaggoner 10y ago
        Oh please, that's ridiculous. "Pro-worker discussion"? "Former management?" This bizarre class warfare / labor vs. management thing you have going on is so over the top it's ridiculous. This isn't a garment sweatshop in the 1800s. Even if the person you're responding to on some internet forum is the president of the Foundation For Keeping Software Developers from Being Overpaid, it's not unethical for them to jump into a discussion on the merits without disclosing that fact. Why are you so afraid of having a frank discussion about this, with anyone? Slinging around terms like "extraordinarily unethical" when they're not even remotely warranted just makes it seem like you have little faith that your position makes any rational sense.
gingerrr 10y ago
I'd take issue with your claim that the response by GP was the first emotional or attacking blow - that response was to GGP's "easy hipster life" claim, and the implicit claim therein that GP's call for labor solidarity was spoiled whining rather than, perhaps, a call for skilled workers in an industry to support each other's negotiation positions rather than undercut each other. > It's not reasonable to expect other software developers to refuse to raise rational points of inquiry that you've based your argument on because it may result in weakening your argument on the merits. What argument are you claiming is weakened? GP is saying that our overall, industry-wide labor bargaining position is weakened when a subset of us willingly take suboptimal work-hour or payment arrangements - really they're giving the companies and hiring side of the discussions all of the leverage over us while dropping our price floor out from under us. If that sort of thing continues, it signals to the market that we are not skilled labor, just labor. And then all the software jobs run overseas where they are cheaper, just like manufacturing has done over the last 50 years (and software has already begun to). Maybe the original comment GP's response to wasn't the right one - but it's the right sentiment in this discussion of whether work-life balance is a good thing. How is that even a question?
- ThrustVectoring 10y ago
  My biggest beef is that it's undermining a set of strategies for playing office politics. It's in my best interest to enforce boundaries on work-life balance. It's also in my best interest to talk about enforcing those boundaries in terms of what the company wants, rather than what I want.
  - gingerrr 10y ago
    That last point is a great one I hadn't considered. Framing work-life balance as a business need is the only tenable bargaining position we will continue to have. Thanks for the clarification.
- ryanwaggoner 10y ago
  What argument are you claiming is weakened? I'm not saying any argument is weakened. This is analogous to what I saw: 1. Article claims X, which is good for software devs as a whole. 2. Software dev #1 says "Hmm...is X even true? Doesn't make sense for reasons A, B, and C." 3. Software dev #2 says "Hey, we're trying to negotiate here and it doesn't matter if X is true or not. You shouldn't even be pointing out that it might not be true and that we should have more evidence. You're a traitor!" Sorry, but I have a lot more respect for software dev #1's position than software dev #2's position. I want to be associated with a community of people who are looking for the truth, even if it leads them somewhere difficult, not protecting themselves at the expense of others, truth be damned. And I certainly don't want to be associated with a group that not only doesn't want the truth, but yells at anyone within that group who dares to challenge the consensus. Ugh.
vibrato 10y ago
An attack on character isn't necessarily an ad hominem fallacy. The poster engaged directly with the argument, and didn't rely on the character attack to make his argument.

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]