5 ms·

My cynical self noticed that there are a lot of "apologize" and "sorry" in this update, yet I believe this is a first good step. However, the update accumulate

My cynical self noticed that there are a lot of "apologize" and "sorry" in this update, yet I believe this is a first good step. However, the update accumulated to the 'fix' being SO will release an updated CoC on Oct 7/10/11 with inputs from all mods, and an updated mod firing process. These are absolutely essential, no doubt, but incomplete. What is missing, in my opinion, is the update still did not address how the original conflict came to the firing of a respected member. The most sincere way to apologize would be to use this failure of process as an example, to showcase how SO erred and how SO intends to change. Finally, a separate, public apology to the fired mod, with specific example of how SO mishandled each step, is crucial in regaining the trust. EDIT: After giving some thoughts, I realize that SO is apologizing, not for wrongful termination, but for not privately firing the mod with due process. In SO's management eyes, the firing is still justified. Fine. Explain to us, with examples, how the firing is justified, and how pronoun usage would re-conciliate with moderators with religion restrictions.

marcinzm 7y ago
>Explain to us, with examples, how the firing is justified, and how pronoun usage would re-conciliate with moderators with religion restrictions. It's clear they have no desire to explain and would very much prefer nothing further is made public: >We’ll keep those discussions completely private unless we both agree to share any of it with the community.
emmelaich 7y ago
I can't really understand this sentence of yours > My cynical self noticed that there are a lot of "apologize" and "sorry" in this update, yet I believe this is a first good step. in particular with the "yet". Would it be a better first step without apologies?
- magicalhippo 7y ago
  It reads like a clinical PR piece. Mostly it reads as they're sorry it blew up in their face, and it doesn't really feel like they're sorry about what they did except harm themselves. Then again, I might just be a bit jaded like GP.
mirimir 7y ago
> how pronoun usage would re-conciliate with moderators with religion restrictions It seems clear that, in their updated CoC, the requirement to be respectful trumps religious restrictions. And that's pretty much the standard here, isn't it? I can't imagine rudeness being OK here, even if it's required religiously.
- throwaway82737 7y ago
  That's a pretty large canyon you're leaping across to conflate someone's personal preference to how they get addressed and rudeness being "required religiously". Oops, I just used "they" without asking the hypothetical "someone" how they'd like to be addressed. I assume youd also say someone believing a man cannot be a woman is someone who should be wiped from the public discourse of the internet as well. Can you be offended by it? Absolutely, but there is nothing inherently "rude" about such a statement. I prefer to be addressed "Sir Knight of the Round Table". Failure to do so will constitute breaking HN and SE CoC. It doesn't take far down the rabbit hole for the shoe to land on the other side.
  - mirimir 7y ago
    Well, Sir Knight of the Round Table, I don't have any problem with that. It's a little on the long side, but whatever makes you happy. Seriously, though, that just simplifies to male. I'm just an old anonymous coward who doesn't get out much. But I did ask a younger friend about this, and got that people who care advertise their declared status in their sig and/or username. As does, for example, "Zoe the transgirl".
    - reitanqild 7y ago
      > Seriously, though, that just simplifies to male. Seriously, I'm tired of this. In what company that HNers want to work in does being a male give you any advantage? Or in what school? (I'm aware of certain nurse and chemistry studies prioritizing men, but that's it.) If you cannot come up with any I kindly suggest stop insulting men. You don't need to do that to support others. - Someone who has gone out of his way to help women and immigrants

marcinzm 7y ago

>Explain to us, with examples, how the firing is justified, and how pronoun usage would re-conciliate with moderators with religion restrictions. It's clear they have no desire to explain and would very much prefer nothing further is made public: >We’ll keep those discussions completely private unless we both agree to share any of it with the community.

emmelaich 7y ago

I can't really understand this sentence of yours > My cynical self noticed that there are a lot of "apologize" and "sorry" in this update, yet I believe this is a first good step. in particular with the "yet". Would it be a better first step without apologies?

magicalhippo 7y ago
It reads like a clinical PR piece. Mostly it reads as they're sorry it blew up in their face, and it doesn't really feel like they're sorry about what they did except harm themselves. Then again, I might just be a bit jaded like GP.

mirimir 7y ago

> how pronoun usage would re-conciliate with moderators with religion restrictions It seems clear that, in their updated CoC, the requirement to be respectful trumps religious restrictions. And that's pretty much the standard here, isn't it? I can't imagine rudeness being OK here, even if it's required religiously.

throwaway82737 7y ago
That's a pretty large canyon you're leaping across to conflate someone's personal preference to how they get addressed and rudeness being "required religiously". Oops, I just used "they" without asking the hypothetical "someone" how they'd like to be addressed. I assume youd also say someone believing a man cannot be a woman is someone who should be wiped from the public discourse of the internet as well. Can you be offended by it? Absolutely, but there is nothing inherently "rude" about such a statement. I prefer to be addressed "Sir Knight of the Round Table". Failure to do so will constitute breaking HN and SE CoC. It doesn't take far down the rabbit hole for the shoe to land on the other side.
- mirimir 7y ago
  Well, Sir Knight of the Round Table, I don't have any problem with that. It's a little on the long side, but whatever makes you happy. Seriously, though, that just simplifies to male. I'm just an old anonymous coward who doesn't get out much. But I did ask a younger friend about this, and got that people who care advertise their declared status in their sig and/or username. As does, for example, "Zoe the transgirl".
  - reitanqild 7y ago
    > Seriously, though, that just simplifies to male. Seriously, I'm tired of this. In what company that HNers want to work in does being a male give you any advantage? Or in what school? (I'm aware of certain nurse and chemistry studies prioritizing men, but that's it.) If you cannot come up with any I kindly suggest stop insulting men. You don't need to do that to support others. - Someone who has gone out of his way to help women and immigrants