5 ms·

Absolutely true. I would support any criticism of a lack of female presenters and so on. But "criticizing" humor is in my view the highest form of arrogance ex

by stfu 15y ago

Absolutely true. I would support any criticism of a lack of female presenters and so on. But "criticizing" humor is in my view the highest form of arrogance existing. Telling other people what they are allowed to find funny and what not is just pure hypocrisy. If someone can't look behind a few unfunny remarks and pull the "I AM OFFENDED" card, any further argument seems impossible. I think there is a need besides the reductio ad hitlerum to introduce a reductio ad affendendum.

pyre 15y ago
'A few' seems to be the operative phrase here. At least in the one talk, it sounds like the entire talk was just an excuse to make dirty jokes, and actually had a lack of content. If the even itself is meant to be professional, then don't bring in presenters that are more interested in being comedians than actually teaching.
- stfu 15y ago
  The subject of the talk should have alerted any potential visitor of upcoming profanities. Plus the situation with these conferences is most of the time a mixture of speakers trying to appeal to different levels of audience members-from students to professionals, from academics to business. I think these are two different issues, one the lack of content and the other her complaining on the presentation. If a talk turns out to be disappointing there is always the option to leave, sneak into another talk, have a break, go outside, bond with other "leavers" and so on. There will always be individual preferences in regards to conference presentations and content but expecting that they have all to fit to ones personal preferences (and values) seems a bit unrealistic.
  - pyre 15y ago
    This seems more like an issue of maturity level. I would liken it to going to a talk at OSCON entitled, "What's Wrong With Microsoft," and finding out that it is just a string of Microsoft jokes. Sure one could have expected that at an Open Source conference. Sure one can walk out of the talk. But am I barred from blogging about my disappointment with the level of professionalism/maturity at the conference? Does my ability to walk out invalidate how that talk reflects on the conference as a whole?

by stfu 15y ago

pyre 15y ago

'A few' seems to be the operative phrase here. At least in the one talk, it sounds like the entire talk was just an excuse to make dirty jokes, and actually had a lack of content. If the even itself is meant to be professional, then don't bring in presenters that are more interested in being comedians than actually teaching.

stfu 15y ago
The subject of the talk should have alerted any potential visitor of upcoming profanities. Plus the situation with these conferences is most of the time a mixture of speakers trying to appeal to different levels of audience members-from students to professionals, from academics to business. I think these are two different issues, one the lack of content and the other her complaining on the presentation. If a talk turns out to be disappointing there is always the option to leave, sneak into another talk, have a break, go outside, bond with other "leavers" and so on. There will always be individual preferences in regards to conference presentations and content but expecting that they have all to fit to ones personal preferences (and values) seems a bit unrealistic.
- pyre 15y ago
  This seems more like an issue of maturity level. I would liken it to going to a talk at OSCON entitled, "What's Wrong With Microsoft," and finding out that it is just a string of Microsoft jokes. Sure one could have expected that at an Open Source conference. Sure one can walk out of the talk. But am I barred from blogging about my disappointment with the level of professionalism/maturity at the conference? Does my ability to walk out invalidate how that talk reflects on the conference as a whole?