5 ms·

Maintaining integrity usually doesn't consist of calling people "fucking scumbags". Notify people of their mistake, make it known that what they have done is no

Maintaining integrity usually doesn't consist of calling people "fucking scumbags". Notify people of their mistake, make it known that what they have done is not acceptable but crossing into personal insults and curses is not acceptable.

stephth 15y ago
fucking |ˈfəkiNG| used for emphasis or to express anger, annoyance, contempt, or surprise. scumbag |ˈskəmˌbag| a contemptible or objectionable person. It's appropriate. EDIT: here's full context per JackWebbHeller's request: @dhh The Sharebooster site is serving even more images straight off the Highrise server: http://yfrog.com/oddh4zoj http://yfrog.com/oddh4zoj . Fucking scumbags.
- JackWebbHeller 15y ago
  It's appropriate when taken out of context with two generic dictionary definitions...
- zerostar07 15y ago
  ad hominem attacks are never appropriate
  - Shenglong 15y ago
    That's not true at all. They are appropriate when you are actually trying to deflate the opposing side's character. For example, if someone has a history of making poor choices, it's likely that any further choice they make is also likely poor. That's why judges often take into consideration whether an offense is someone's first, or someone's third. With that being said, both sides definitely should have reconsidered their PR strategy. Both being techies, it's reasonable to assume that they should be fully aware of how things like this propagate on the internet.
    - zerostar07 15y ago
      So when someone makes the same mistake 3 times, you call them a moron and that fixes it?
      - Shenglong 15y ago
        Did you bother to read my entire post? The first part was correcting his statement. The second part denounced the insult in this case.
        zerostar07 15y ago
        Yes I did. In any case an ad hominem attack is a logical fallacy, and as such it is never appropriate.
  - tertius 15y ago
    This was not ad hominem, please look it up. An ad hominem is used within the confines of an argument. There is no argument here. He is calling them what they are. They stole, that is clear, the argument is air-tight (they have even apologized). I wouldn't use this kind of language myself (not in any circumstance), but ad hominem it is not.
    - zerostar07 15y ago
      Correct. I used the words literally, I meant "personal attacks" instead, which frankly I don't think helped him make his point stronger.
  - damncabbage 15y ago
    "Ad Hominem" doesn't apply here.[1] (DHH didn't say that using 37Signals assets directly was bad because they were fucking scumbags, just that what they did was bad and they were fucking scumbags as a result.) [1] http://plover.net/~bonds/adhominem.html http://plover.net/~bonds/adhominem.html
josephcooney 15y ago
Not acceptable to who? If the course of action you've outlined (notify people of their mistakes etc..) is what you feel is right then doing so would be maintaining your integrity. If DHH feels like they're contemptible for doing what they did tweeting that they are 'fucking scumbags' is maintaining cohesiveness and integrity between his words and feelings. If you choose to think less of DHH as a result of the way he behaved then that is your prerogative, but based on the things he's said publicly about not caring much about seeming 'unprofessional' I don't think he will care much, if at all.
- patrickod 15y ago
  It's not acceptable if you want to present yourself as the spokesperson for a friendly business. If you use your Twitter account as a platform for expressing both your personal and corporate thoughts I think it's best to keep the wording civil. Roasting Curebit over Twitter like this seems childish to me at best.
  - anon808 15y ago
    There are no such things as personal thoughts and corporate thoughts. They're all just thoughts.
  - gsharm 15y ago
    Define acceptable. "friendly business" - as opposed to "unfriendly business"? Explain the difference between personal and "corporate" thoughts. "typical East Coast bullshit." is how Steve Jobs described this sort of drivel. We've entered an age of clearer, more direct and transparent communications. There's no time nor need for formalities.
    - freejack 15y ago
      civility, empathy, professionalism and respect for other people aren't formalities and I think there's lots of room, time and need for them in modern business practice.
  - ahoyhere 15y ago
rhizome 15y ago
Are you saying that they weren't fucking scumbags?
- bonch 15y ago
  Of course he's not.
ahoyhere 15y ago
Integrity is personal -- and it means doing what you say, and vice versa. In other words, congruency. Which means that it's perfectly integral and congruent for DHH to call somebody a "fucking scumbag" when that person steals from DHH's company. His values, and his words, and his actions all line up perfectly. He is behaving exactly like himself. Even if you fall back on the dictionary definition of "the quality of being honest and having strong moral character," it fits. Just because YOU don't think somebody should use a certain word doesn't mean they lack integrity. It also doesn't mean that anyone else cares.
- freejack 15y ago
  while not always true, a lack of professionalism typically signals a lack of integrity.
  - ahoyhere 15y ago
    There is no single definition of "professionalism," and the word is therefore totally meaningless the way you use it.
    - deleted 15y ago
      [deleted]
    - sambeau 15y ago
      I have found that "professionalism" is generally incompatible with honesty and integrity. Professionals are judged on appearance and appearance of action: not on what they actually do and the consequences of their actions. Similarly, to act "professionally" often means to act against your personal beliefs, to suppress your emotion, to ignore empathy and to react coldly. To be "business-like" is often to be cruel and socially irresponsible: that's "just business". I would like to be judged by my demeanour rather than my appearance and on the consequence of my actions rather than my actions.
  - freejack 15y ago
    I find it remarkable the extent to which this comment was down voted. I stand by my comments, and will even go one step further to explicitly state that I think DHH and Curebit handled this unprofessionally. I don't know any of the people involved, so I can't say a thing about their integrity, which isn't my point. How you handle yourself in situations like this signals certain things to people that they then interpret and use a data to form an opinion about you and your business. I've posted elsewhere how the Curebit misstep caused me to form an opinion about the maturity of their product. I'm not going to bother of relating how DHH's response has changed my opinion of the 37Signals business, especially on HN given the ridiculous moderating practices related to anything remotely critical of 37Signals. /r

stephth 15y ago

fucking |ˈfəkiNG| used for emphasis or to express anger, annoyance, contempt, or surprise. scumbag |ˈskəmˌbag| a contemptible or objectionable person. It's appropriate. EDIT: here's full context per JackWebbHeller's request: @dhh The Sharebooster site is serving even more images straight off the Highrise server: http://yfrog.com/oddh4zoj http://yfrog.com/oddh4zoj . Fucking scumbags.

JackWebbHeller 15y ago
It's appropriate when taken out of context with two generic dictionary definitions...
zerostar07 15y ago
ad hominem attacks are never appropriate
- Shenglong 15y ago
  That's not true at all. They are appropriate when you are actually trying to deflate the opposing side's character. For example, if someone has a history of making poor choices, it's likely that any further choice they make is also likely poor. That's why judges often take into consideration whether an offense is someone's first, or someone's third. With that being said, both sides definitely should have reconsidered their PR strategy. Both being techies, it's reasonable to assume that they should be fully aware of how things like this propagate on the internet.
  - zerostar07 15y ago
    So when someone makes the same mistake 3 times, you call them a moron and that fixes it?
    - Shenglong 15y ago
      Did you bother to read my entire post? The first part was correcting his statement. The second part denounced the insult in this case.
      - zerostar07 15y ago
        Yes I did. In any case an ad hominem attack is a logical fallacy, and as such it is never appropriate.
- tertius 15y ago
  This was not ad hominem, please look it up. An ad hominem is used within the confines of an argument. There is no argument here. He is calling them what they are. They stole, that is clear, the argument is air-tight (they have even apologized). I wouldn't use this kind of language myself (not in any circumstance), but ad hominem it is not.
  - zerostar07 15y ago
    Correct. I used the words literally, I meant "personal attacks" instead, which frankly I don't think helped him make his point stronger.
- damncabbage 15y ago
  "Ad Hominem" doesn't apply here.[1] (DHH didn't say that using 37Signals assets directly was bad because they were fucking scumbags, just that what they did was bad and they were fucking scumbags as a result.) [1] http://plover.net/~bonds/adhominem.html http://plover.net/~bonds/adhominem.html

josephcooney 15y ago

Not acceptable to who? If the course of action you've outlined (notify people of their mistakes etc..) is what you feel is right then doing so would be maintaining your integrity. If DHH feels like they're contemptible for doing what they did tweeting that they are 'fucking scumbags' is maintaining cohesiveness and integrity between his words and feelings. If you choose to think less of DHH as a result of the way he behaved then that is your prerogative, but based on the things he's said publicly about not caring much about seeming 'unprofessional' I don't think he will care much, if at all.

patrickod 15y ago
It's not acceptable if you want to present yourself as the spokesperson for a friendly business. If you use your Twitter account as a platform for expressing both your personal and corporate thoughts I think it's best to keep the wording civil. Roasting Curebit over Twitter like this seems childish to me at best.
- anon808 15y ago
  There are no such things as personal thoughts and corporate thoughts. They're all just thoughts.
- gsharm 15y ago
  Define acceptable. "friendly business" - as opposed to "unfriendly business"? Explain the difference between personal and "corporate" thoughts. "typical East Coast bullshit." is how Steve Jobs described this sort of drivel. We've entered an age of clearer, more direct and transparent communications. There's no time nor need for formalities.
  - freejack 15y ago
    civility, empathy, professionalism and respect for other people aren't formalities and I think there's lots of room, time and need for them in modern business practice.
- ahoyhere 15y ago

rhizome 15y ago

Are you saying that they weren't fucking scumbags?

bonch 15y ago
Of course he's not.

ahoyhere 15y ago

Integrity is personal -- and it means doing what you say, and vice versa. In other words, congruency. Which means that it's perfectly integral and congruent for DHH to call somebody a "fucking scumbag" when that person steals from DHH's company. His values, and his words, and his actions all line up perfectly. He is behaving exactly like himself. Even if you fall back on the dictionary definition of "the quality of being honest and having strong moral character," it fits. Just because YOU don't think somebody should use a certain word doesn't mean they lack integrity. It also doesn't mean that anyone else cares.

freejack 15y ago
while not always true, a lack of professionalism typically signals a lack of integrity.
- ahoyhere 15y ago
  There is no single definition of "professionalism," and the word is therefore totally meaningless the way you use it.
  - deleted 15y ago
    [deleted]
  - sambeau 15y ago
    I have found that "professionalism" is generally incompatible with honesty and integrity. Professionals are judged on appearance and appearance of action: not on what they actually do and the consequences of their actions. Similarly, to act "professionally" often means to act against your personal beliefs, to suppress your emotion, to ignore empathy and to react coldly. To be "business-like" is often to be cruel and socially irresponsible: that's "just business". I would like to be judged by my demeanour rather than my appearance and on the consequence of my actions rather than my actions.
- freejack 15y ago
  I find it remarkable the extent to which this comment was down voted. I stand by my comments, and will even go one step further to explicitly state that I think DHH and Curebit handled this unprofessionally. I don't know any of the people involved, so I can't say a thing about their integrity, which isn't my point. How you handle yourself in situations like this signals certain things to people that they then interpret and use a data to form an opinion about you and your business. I've posted elsewhere how the Curebit misstep caused me to form an opinion about the maturity of their product. I'm not going to bother of relating how DHH's response has changed my opinion of the 37Signals business, especially on HN given the ridiculous moderating practices related to anything remotely critical of 37Signals. /r