3 ms·
This is stupid. Mentioning a few specific issues doesn’t mean others aren’t important. This is the same cudgel used by people to silence support for specific c
by dagmx 4y ago
This is stupid.
Mentioning a few specific issues doesn’t mean others aren’t important. This is the same cudgel used by people to silence support for specific causes by saying “well what about these other ones???”
This entire post is based on a logical fallacy.
So what if the posts align more with what is seen in the US? If the majority of the team are from there, then it is their every right to post those things. It is not anyone’s right here however to ask them to post about other topics. You may bring awareness to the team about those but that’s where it ends.
This whole post feels like the age old: “I don’t want to think about the human element in tech, so leave it out”
However tech exists to serve humanity. The compiler exists to serve people. The compiler is made by people. Therefore tech is inherently human and humans are allowed to, and should, care about what’s going on.
The “I wish life wasn’t political” crowd simply aren’t at risk from the ignorance of politics. This is privilege. This is entitlement. To care about those who are at risk from political events is not a flaw and it’s really disappointing to see how many people believe that politics can be neatly boxed away.
- PoignardAzur 4y ago> Mentioning a few specific issues doesn’t mean others aren’t important. I got that objection enough that I think I failed at communicating my main point. I really don't want to encourage a mindset of "if you don't cover every bad thing you can't talk about any bad thing". But I think if you as an organization start to make it an habit to talk about bad things (and three times make a pattern), at some point you have to think seriously about which bad things you want to mention and why. I think there should be a documented process. Honestly, any process at all would be fine, it doesn't have to be drawn-out or rigorous. But it should exist.
- dagmx 4y ago> at some point you have to think seriously about which bad things you want to mention and why. I’m confused by how you think those statements ended up there. Do you think they’re from a single random poster? Or do they just show up without thought? Clearly someone has taken a measured stance in posting about those. If that is the case, then why don’t you also believe they put serious thought into what they posted? Why is the assumption that there isn’t a process within the team? Your argument is based on a flawed assumption.