5 ms·

> just because you don't see it as bullying - and bullies rarely see it that way - it doesn't mean it isn't bullying I disagree with this claim, which seems in

> just because you don't see it as bullying - and bullies rarely see it that way - it doesn't mean it isn't bullying I disagree with this claim, which seems indicative of the current moment in (U.S.) culture. There has to be some kind of cohesive, functional system of standards (or rules or basic shared definitions) for all of us to be able to communicate and work together. It would be a very dysfunctional world if everything were entirely subjective, particularly definitions of "good" and "bad" behavior. At some point we have be able to distinguish our feelings from their causes and be able to evaluate the causes against a standard of behavior (when the causes are other people or our selves).

markstos 6y ago
See also posts on intent vs impact: https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=intent%20vs%20impatct https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=intent%20vs%20impatct Impact matters.
NikolaNovak 6y ago
I think the two claims are orthogonal but broadly compatible: - The speaker/bully frequently finds an internal narrative/justification and does not believe they are bullying / inappropriate, individually or in aggregate. "I am just asking" "it's a perfectly reasonable thing to say" "they should have thicker skin" etc. - This is not necessarily incompatible with the notion of having a understood and even agreed/public standard that all communication participants can agree to and conform (though THAT is a WHOOOOLE other can of worms these days, particularly in open source, particularly on these forums; it's a complex, not easily-solvable issue, people have different perspectives and priorities, and it turns out people are trickier than computers :).
fennecfoxen 6y ago
Aw, come on, dude. Why you gotta be all in his face for this? You write that "it would be a very dysfunctional world if everything were entirely subjective." The author's claim states that bullying is not a subjective thing defined by the perceptions of the bully. See? If you just put in half an ounce of effort to minimize conflict, you're agreeing with each other! Try it sometime!
- xibalba 6y ago
  > Why you gotta be all in his face for this? Huh? How am I "in his face"? This is Hacker News. We discuss posts. Sometimes people disagree. After having read the article, I am discussing a direct quote from it. Or do you think we should only discuss things upon which we agree? >The author's claim states that bullying is not a subjective thing defined by the perceptions of the bully. Where, in the article, do you see the author make this claim? To my reading, the implication by the author is that bullying is subjectively defined by the victim of bullying. The author does not point to any kind of code of conduct or standard (or lack thereof) by which the alleged bullying can be judged.
  - fennecfoxen 6y ago
    > How am I "in his face"? Because this poor guy's telling us, "I can't take this anymore," that his volunteering experience was so damn combative and miserable that he quit, and he just wants peace.. And now here you are saying "yeah? well what STANDARDS does he propose by which we can evaluate the VALIDITY OF THE BULLYING?!?" and ... like, come on. It's combative, it's insensitive, and it's an altogether inappropriate demand — you don't get to expect a treatise in the "bullying was too bad, so I quit" letter, even by way of hyperlink. In short, by embodying the problem that made him quit and applying that problem to his quitting.
- dang 6y ago
  Can you please not be snarky on HN and please generally stop posting in the flamewar style? https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html Please note this guideline too: "Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith." I don't think there's a plausible interpretation of the GP comment as being "all in his face"—it was responding to a general question raised by the specific drama, which seems within the intended use of this site. Maybe it's a bad point, I don't know—certainly if you think it is, you're welcome to say why—just not by being snarky or by accusing another user unfairly, which I think you've done in both this comment and https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26780092 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26780092. Also, re that last one, please note the site guideline about not using allcaps for emphasis. It's not the most important point but it makes a significant difference to the threads.
LocalH 6y ago
Standards can be fluid, though. We don't have to live in a world where "one size fits all", and those who aren't wired for compatibility with the current society have to suffer. Everything is subjective, at some level, no matter how much (or how successfully) we attempt to impart objectivity. It's seen through the lens of human psyche. Everything we witness is filtered by our entire life experience. Let's presume the author is not being deceitful. They voiced an opinion about cruft in the language, and received hateful messages that pushed them to entirely leave the community. How is that not bullying? Of course a bully is going to defend their behavior, because it deflects the focus away from them and onto the person accusing them of bullying. Bullying is a serious problem that pervades all of life. From childhood through to adulthood, bullies revel in making people miserable, either because they don't want to care about others (in which case they are a sociopath), or because they haven't been taught to care about others (in which case it could be argued that their parents were sociopaths). The thing is, none of the arguing changes the lived experience of the bullied. The only thing that will change that is people actively making the decision to treat others better.
- CodeGlitch 6y ago
  > Standards can be fluid, though. We don't have to live in a world where "one size fits all", and those who aren't wired for compatibility with the current society have to suffer. Yes but they shouldn't change so quickly, and any changes should be carefully considered, debated and voted on (if possible). As it stands, standards are changing so quickly no one can keep up and we have chaos.
  - LocalH 6y ago
    If we move too slowly on the topic of bullying, then people needlessly suffer.

markstos 6y ago

See also posts on intent vs impact: https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=intent%20vs%20impatct https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=intent%20vs%20impatct Impact matters.

NikolaNovak 6y ago

I think the two claims are orthogonal but broadly compatible: - The speaker/bully frequently finds an internal narrative/justification and does not believe they are bullying / inappropriate, individually or in aggregate. "I am just asking" "it's a perfectly reasonable thing to say" "they should have thicker skin" etc. - This is not necessarily incompatible with the notion of having a understood and even agreed/public standard that all communication participants can agree to and conform (though THAT is a WHOOOOLE other can of worms these days, particularly in open source, particularly on these forums; it's a complex, not easily-solvable issue, people have different perspectives and priorities, and it turns out people are trickier than computers :).

fennecfoxen 6y ago

Aw, come on, dude. Why you gotta be all in his face for this? You write that "it would be a very dysfunctional world if everything were entirely subjective." The author's claim states that bullying is not a subjective thing defined by the perceptions of the bully. See? If you just put in half an ounce of effort to minimize conflict, you're agreeing with each other! Try it sometime!

xibalba 6y ago
> Why you gotta be all in his face for this? Huh? How am I "in his face"? This is Hacker News. We discuss posts. Sometimes people disagree. After having read the article, I am discussing a direct quote from it. Or do you think we should only discuss things upon which we agree? >The author's claim states that bullying is not a subjective thing defined by the perceptions of the bully. Where, in the article, do you see the author make this claim? To my reading, the implication by the author is that bullying is subjectively defined by the victim of bullying. The author does not point to any kind of code of conduct or standard (or lack thereof) by which the alleged bullying can be judged.
- fennecfoxen 6y ago
  > How am I "in his face"? Because this poor guy's telling us, "I can't take this anymore," that his volunteering experience was so damn combative and miserable that he quit, and he just wants peace.. And now here you are saying "yeah? well what STANDARDS does he propose by which we can evaluate the VALIDITY OF THE BULLYING?!?" and ... like, come on. It's combative, it's insensitive, and it's an altogether inappropriate demand — you don't get to expect a treatise in the "bullying was too bad, so I quit" letter, even by way of hyperlink. In short, by embodying the problem that made him quit and applying that problem to his quitting.
dang 6y ago
Can you please not be snarky on HN and please generally stop posting in the flamewar style? https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html Please note this guideline too: "Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith." I don't think there's a plausible interpretation of the GP comment as being "all in his face"—it was responding to a general question raised by the specific drama, which seems within the intended use of this site. Maybe it's a bad point, I don't know—certainly if you think it is, you're welcome to say why—just not by being snarky or by accusing another user unfairly, which I think you've done in both this comment and https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26780092 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26780092. Also, re that last one, please note the site guideline about not using allcaps for emphasis. It's not the most important point but it makes a significant difference to the threads.

LocalH 6y ago

Standards can be fluid, though. We don't have to live in a world where "one size fits all", and those who aren't wired for compatibility with the current society have to suffer. Everything is subjective, at some level, no matter how much (or how successfully) we attempt to impart objectivity. It's seen through the lens of human psyche. Everything we witness is filtered by our entire life experience. Let's presume the author is not being deceitful. They voiced an opinion about cruft in the language, and received hateful messages that pushed them to entirely leave the community. How is that not bullying? Of course a bully is going to defend their behavior, because it deflects the focus away from them and onto the person accusing them of bullying. Bullying is a serious problem that pervades all of life. From childhood through to adulthood, bullies revel in making people miserable, either because they don't want to care about others (in which case they are a sociopath), or because they haven't been taught to care about others (in which case it could be argued that their parents were sociopaths). The thing is, none of the arguing changes the lived experience of the bullied. The only thing that will change that is people actively making the decision to treat others better.

CodeGlitch 6y ago
> Standards can be fluid, though. We don't have to live in a world where "one size fits all", and those who aren't wired for compatibility with the current society have to suffer. Yes but they shouldn't change so quickly, and any changes should be carefully considered, debated and voted on (if possible). As it stands, standards are changing so quickly no one can keep up and we have chaos.
- LocalH 6y ago
  If we move too slowly on the topic of bullying, then people needlessly suffer.