3 ms·
You give too much power to these toxic groups, I recommend just ignoring them completely. The alternative is basically giving them the ability to censor what yo
by ddlsmurf 9y ago
You give too much power to these toxic groups, I recommend just ignoring them completely. The alternative is basically giving them the ability to censor what you read, litmus or not, seems unwise. I know nothing of Cernovich sorry. It certainly served you poorly here. His infamous memo is the best, most scientifically literate proposal towards more diversity in IT, its portrayal is truly discouraging.
- dopamean 9y agoIt didn't censor what I read though. I read the memo fully. I thought it wasn't particularly interesting. Then I saw who did. I'm not sure what you think I missed.
- ddlsmurf 9y agoWell his sum up suggests two things: If we are to be truly free and diverse, we shouldn't expect perfect representation everywhere (ie. may be it's not a problem that 50% of lumberjacks aren't women), and to make engineering more diverse, the current approach (positive discrimination) is unfair, we should instead embrace gender differences and modify methodology in IT to be more female oriented, he suggests pair programming based on psychological research indicating women are more people oriented, and men more thing oriented. There is no value judgment there, just a sound, scientifically literate approach to change.
- ddlsmurf 9y agoI'll put it another way: if you found his memo non interesting, you are not interested in science, in making the workplace more diverse, in being fair and open, and you will have no part in whistle-blowing.
- dopamean 9y agoI found it not interesting because it didn't feel very scientific like you said. It sounded like a high schooler's argument and was cited like one. Your condescending tone is appreciated.
- ddlsmurf 9y agoWell I think those things are important and interesting. Your appreciation of "sounding like" is failing you and us on our road to inclusivity.