3 ms·

Do you think this person is unusual in her communication style? She posted the complete text of the "problem" comment. If you got that message from a colleague,

Do you think this person is unusual in her communication style? She posted the complete text of the "problem" comment. If you got that message from a colleague, would you consider it unacceptable? Why or why not? If yes, what could she have said that would have made it OK? How would you answer her core question of whether or not the comment she made is appropriate?

Dirlewanger 9y ago
I'm disgusted at her reflection that the question was transphobic, not that she commented on the difference. Whether the data scientist overreacted or not is irrelevant.
- ivraatiems 9y ago
  It's not irrelevant because it's the reason she was fired, and hence the reason the post exists. The fact that you disagree with her assertion about the question seems to be the irrelevant thing to me.
  - Dirlewanger 9y ago
    No, it is irrelevant. The fact that the incident got her fired is a failing with GitHub's management and dearth of communication. Playing the victim card and shitting on the data scientist is misguided.
    - ivraatiems 9y ago
      But it seems to me that if GitHub failed her in its practices, she was a victim. Why wouldn't she be?
- dcole2929 9y ago
  Calling a comment transphobic in no way implies that the speaker of that comment is transhpobic. It is a description of what's been said. The same way if someone was to say something that could possibly be construed as racist. If someone points that out and says hey that statement is racist, that's not calling that person racist. They might be. They might not, but that statement in and of itself implies no assertion on that actual person. In short, calling the statement in question transphobic is correct.
  - fenwick67 9y ago
    Intent is the difference between being transphobic and being ignorant. The survey question was ignorant.
    - roguecoder 9y ago
      How silly it sounds to anthropomorphize the question that way should tell you that you are wrong in this case. A question doesn't have a brain to be ignorant with, nor does it have intentions of any sort: once someone has written it down, it just is. In TDD, do we talk about a unit test succeeding because I intended for it to fail and it did? No, we say it failed because the actual result is red. I didn't fail, but the test sure did. Intention doesn't change the impact of communication; if the intent doesn't match the actual outcome, what it means is that the author probably wanted to change it.
  - Sorreah 9y ago
    >Calling a comment transphobic in no way implies that the speaker of that comment is transhpobic. Then what does it imply, that the comment has a phobia of or holds hate for trans people? If I call your post autistic, does that not imply I think less of you for making it?
fenwick67 9y ago
Re-structure the question and switch gender out for cake flavors. "What flavor of cake do you prefer? Chocolate, vanilla, or sheetcake?" the feedback coming back as... "'Sheetcake' is not a flavor. Sheetcake may be vanilla, chocolate, red velvet, lemon-poppyseed... If you want to know if a survey respondent likes sheetcake, you need to explicitly ask that question." ... it does seem kinda grating but not overtly so. It could have been nicer but also could have been more rude.
- ivraatiems 9y ago
  I completely agree. I know and have worked with many people who communicate that way. I'd probably prefer it if they didn't, but I also don't generally have a problem when they do. I would feel that the explanation was unnecessarily pedantic and perhaps the slightest bit disrespectful in its assumption that I didn't know what I was talking about, but I would assume that was unintentional. It's interesting that the reaction from this data scientist individual came back so extremely negative.
- sgt 9y ago
  The more I think of it, this whole thing is like something out of Portlandia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portlandia_(TV_series) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portlandia_(TV_series)

Dirlewanger 9y ago

I'm disgusted at her reflection that the question was transphobic, not that she commented on the difference. Whether the data scientist overreacted or not is irrelevant.

ivraatiems 9y ago
It's not irrelevant because it's the reason she was fired, and hence the reason the post exists. The fact that you disagree with her assertion about the question seems to be the irrelevant thing to me.
- Dirlewanger 9y ago
  No, it is irrelevant. The fact that the incident got her fired is a failing with GitHub's management and dearth of communication. Playing the victim card and shitting on the data scientist is misguided.
  - ivraatiems 9y ago
    But it seems to me that if GitHub failed her in its practices, she was a victim. Why wouldn't she be?
dcole2929 9y ago
Calling a comment transphobic in no way implies that the speaker of that comment is transhpobic. It is a description of what's been said. The same way if someone was to say something that could possibly be construed as racist. If someone points that out and says hey that statement is racist, that's not calling that person racist. They might be. They might not, but that statement in and of itself implies no assertion on that actual person. In short, calling the statement in question transphobic is correct.
- fenwick67 9y ago
  Intent is the difference between being transphobic and being ignorant. The survey question was ignorant.
  - roguecoder 9y ago
    How silly it sounds to anthropomorphize the question that way should tell you that you are wrong in this case. A question doesn't have a brain to be ignorant with, nor does it have intentions of any sort: once someone has written it down, it just is. In TDD, do we talk about a unit test succeeding because I intended for it to fail and it did? No, we say it failed because the actual result is red. I didn't fail, but the test sure did. Intention doesn't change the impact of communication; if the intent doesn't match the actual outcome, what it means is that the author probably wanted to change it.
- Sorreah 9y ago
  >Calling a comment transphobic in no way implies that the speaker of that comment is transhpobic. Then what does it imply, that the comment has a phobia of or holds hate for trans people? If I call your post autistic, does that not imply I think less of you for making it?

fenwick67 9y ago

Re-structure the question and switch gender out for cake flavors. "What flavor of cake do you prefer? Chocolate, vanilla, or sheetcake?" the feedback coming back as... "'Sheetcake' is not a flavor. Sheetcake may be vanilla, chocolate, red velvet, lemon-poppyseed... If you want to know if a survey respondent likes sheetcake, you need to explicitly ask that question." ... it does seem kinda grating but not overtly so. It could have been nicer but also could have been more rude.

ivraatiems 9y ago
I completely agree. I know and have worked with many people who communicate that way. I'd probably prefer it if they didn't, but I also don't generally have a problem when they do. I would feel that the explanation was unnecessarily pedantic and perhaps the slightest bit disrespectful in its assumption that I didn't know what I was talking about, but I would assume that was unintentional. It's interesting that the reaction from this data scientist individual came back so extremely negative.
sgt 9y ago
The more I think of it, this whole thing is like something out of Portlandia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portlandia_(TV_series) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portlandia_(TV_series)