4 ms·

Ok, sure, I can clarify that. I was talking about a pattern of commentary downplaying the professional consequences for running afoul of DEI orthodoxy, as if it

Ok, sure, I can clarify that. I was talking about a pattern of commentary downplaying the professional consequences for running afoul of DEI orthodoxy, as if it is not worth discussing. The op-ed author here was not fired. However, Don McNeil of the NYT was pushed out, and as of yet has not found a comparable job AFAIK. He's just one example of the many whose experiences with DEI administrative authoritarianism have been minimized as unimportant. Justine Sacco is another, although she did eventually get back on her feet. The point is, there's always a way to minimize and downplay and say that it could have been worse for the person who suffered some consequence. But it's just a deflection from whether the consequence itself was appropriate.

md8z 5y ago
Sorry but I still have no idea what you mean by "DEI orthodoxy" or "DEI administrative authoritarianism", I don't understand what that is supposed to mean and the way you've used them seems to be religiously/politically charged. You may also want to pay attention to the HN guidelines: "Please don't use Hacker News for political or ideological battle. It tramples curiosity." If you want to discuss what consequence was appropriate then we can talk about that, but your comment didn't mention anything further about that, instead you talked about a pattern of something that I don't understand what it is and then didn't clarify.
- civilized 5y ago
  Ok. There is a pattern of people being punished disproportionately for saying or doing things that someone interpreted to be racially offensive or inappropriate, but weren't deserving of punishment from my perspective. The principle underlying the pattern seems to be "if you offended a member of a marginalized group, you must suffer consequences regardless of context or any defense you may have for yourself." I disagree with this principle and I disagree with downplaying the consequences that have been doled out on its basis. Let me know if you find this thesis interesting enough to discuss, question, or dispute. Otherwise I think I've made myself clear enough at this point.
  - md8z 5y ago
    Thanks for this, that's a good explanation. I don't have anything to dispute regarding your principle, but you only mentioned two people so I don't know if I would really call that a pattern of anything in particular. Also I don't even see how that's related to this article at all, as the author doesn't say anything specifically about racial issues or marginalized groups. I think you may be looking for a pattern that isn't there? Edit: If you want my own perspective, the author makes some really baffling and unprofessional statements in this article that I think would make me not want to have this person as my educator. But I wouldn't say they're related to any group in particular, there are just a lot of bad university professors out there who have no respect for their students.
    - civilized 5y ago
      I could easily provide a dozen more examples. Would that be enough to start taking the pattern seriously? If not, what level of evidence would you need?
      - md8z 5y ago
        I don't know why you want me to take any pattern seriously or why that would be relevant, or what either of us could possibly do in any case. We can give our opinion (which we already did) but beyond that, if we don't work at or attend MIT then it seems to not be our business who they decide to employ or who they decide to reprimand. If you agree that it's not related to this author then maybe it's a conversation best left for a different time. And even later, you could post lots of evidence of something happening, but that still would not explain what needs to be taken seriously and why.
        civilized 5y ago
        Why bother to complain about the small sample size if you don't see the point of the discussion to begin with? I feel like I'm being led down blind alleys and wasting my time here. Do you just want to pick at anything that would discredit whatever I've most recently said? Seems unproductive.

md8z 5y ago

Sorry but I still have no idea what you mean by "DEI orthodoxy" or "DEI administrative authoritarianism", I don't understand what that is supposed to mean and the way you've used them seems to be religiously/politically charged. You may also want to pay attention to the HN guidelines: "Please don't use Hacker News for political or ideological battle. It tramples curiosity." If you want to discuss what consequence was appropriate then we can talk about that, but your comment didn't mention anything further about that, instead you talked about a pattern of something that I don't understand what it is and then didn't clarify.

civilized 5y ago
Ok. There is a pattern of people being punished disproportionately for saying or doing things that someone interpreted to be racially offensive or inappropriate, but weren't deserving of punishment from my perspective. The principle underlying the pattern seems to be "if you offended a member of a marginalized group, you must suffer consequences regardless of context or any defense you may have for yourself." I disagree with this principle and I disagree with downplaying the consequences that have been doled out on its basis. Let me know if you find this thesis interesting enough to discuss, question, or dispute. Otherwise I think I've made myself clear enough at this point.
- md8z 5y ago
  Thanks for this, that's a good explanation. I don't have anything to dispute regarding your principle, but you only mentioned two people so I don't know if I would really call that a pattern of anything in particular. Also I don't even see how that's related to this article at all, as the author doesn't say anything specifically about racial issues or marginalized groups. I think you may be looking for a pattern that isn't there? Edit: If you want my own perspective, the author makes some really baffling and unprofessional statements in this article that I think would make me not want to have this person as my educator. But I wouldn't say they're related to any group in particular, there are just a lot of bad university professors out there who have no respect for their students.
  - civilized 5y ago
    I could easily provide a dozen more examples. Would that be enough to start taking the pattern seriously? If not, what level of evidence would you need?
    - md8z 5y ago
      I don't know why you want me to take any pattern seriously or why that would be relevant, or what either of us could possibly do in any case. We can give our opinion (which we already did) but beyond that, if we don't work at or attend MIT then it seems to not be our business who they decide to employ or who they decide to reprimand. If you agree that it's not related to this author then maybe it's a conversation best left for a different time. And even later, you could post lots of evidence of something happening, but that still would not explain what needs to be taken seriously and why.
      - civilized 5y ago
        Why bother to complain about the small sample size if you don't see the point of the discussion to begin with? I feel like I'm being led down blind alleys and wasting my time here. Do you just want to pick at anything that would discredit whatever I've most recently said? Seems unproductive.