3 ms·

I think this is confusing two very different things. You are "entitled" to have this opinion in that (a) you shouldn't be locked in prison for stating this opin

by batista 15y ago

I think this is confusing two very different things. You are "entitled" to have this opinion in that (a) you shouldn't be locked in prison for stating this opinion and (b) I am not allowed to beat you up for having this opinion. However, that opinion is wrong. You should stop having it, and if you express it at work you will and should be fired. So one is only allowed to have the "right" opinions? And who gets to judge that? If it's the majority, then what if a poll showed that most Americans are against, say, abortion or gay rights? (Or most of Utah residents, at a local level). If it's just some minority with power (the government, the PC police, etc), why should they get to say it instead of the majority? So, you're walking a very fine line here. He is entitled to think whatever, include slavery or the annihilation of mankind, and people should not only not put him in prison for it, but not even fire him for it. They can disagree all they want with him for it, though. Now, if he tries to put his slavery ideals to practice, that's a totally different matter. I think this is exactly analogous to this case. Sqoot could have held a successful hackathon if they didn't display their sexism in their ad copy, but the root problem is the sexism, not the ad copy. That's why the apology rubs people the wrong way. Case in point. I am from a different country, and we would probably laugh at the very idea of the apology, not on the "sexism". Why something that's ok for, say, a casino or a sports bar (female waitresses) is bad for a hackathon? Because a coding marathon should be for both sexes? Well, aren't casinos for both sexes too? How come they get to have women waitresses? Also, who said the organizers of this PARTICULAR hackathon want it to be? Is it that they SHOULD want it to be? Is the message that one cannot organize an event the way he likes it, provided he doesn't do anything illegal?

i_cannot_hack 15y ago
> Why something that's ok for, say, a casino or a sports bar (female waitresses) is bad for a hackathon? Because a coding marathon should be for both sexes? Well, aren't casinos for both sexes too? How come they get to have women waitresses? Also, who said the organizers of this PARTICULAR hackathon want it to be? I think it has a lot to do with expectations. People held the hackaton to a higher standard than, for example, a strip club, and therefore they are a lot more vocal about it when the organizers fail to live up to what was expected of them. > Is it that they SHOULD want it to be? Is the message that one cannot organize an event the way he likes it, provided he doesn't do anything illegal? They have all the rights in the world to organize a hackathon the way they want it, but that also means that the general public has all the rights in the world to dislike it, i.e be outraged.
- batista 15y ago
  I think it has a lot to do with expectations. People held the hackaton to a higher standard than, for example, a strip club, and therefore they are a lot more vocal about it when the organizers fail to live up to what was expected of them. Maybe. For me a hackathon is a pointless thing, like a "machismo" competition for nerds. They have all the rights in the world to organize a hackathon the way they want it, but that also means that the general public has all the rights in the world to dislike it, i.e be outraged. Well, with that I fully agree.
samth 15y ago
So one is only allowed to have the "right" opinions? I think it's pretty obvious that everyone should try to have correct ideas. For example, if you think that Mac OS X is the world's most widely-used desktop OS, then you are wrong, and you should revise your thinking on the subject. Similarly, if you think that IP guarantees reliable delivery, you should think something else, because you're not right. Thinking that it's ok to make people slaves because of the color of their skin (or any other reason) is also wrong, and if you think that (I assume no one on HN does), you should revise your thinking on the subject. Saying, at work, that you think your coworkers should be made into slaves seems like a pretty obvious firing offense to me. As for whether an event can be both legal and a bad thing, I think it's pretty obvious that something can -- imagine I organized an event to write patches with backdoors for the linux kernel. If you said you were going to organize an event like that, I would say that you shouldn't do it.
- batista 15y ago
  > I think it's pretty obvious that everyone should try to have correct ideas. For example, if you think that Mac OS X is the world's most widely-used desktop OS, then you are wrong, and you should revise your thinking on the subject. Similarly, if you think that IP guarantees reliable delivery, you should think something else, because you're not right. That about factual correctness. Another ballgame altogether. Whether a hackathon should have female waitresses or not is an ethical/moral issue. In any case, not something that can be objectively counted and checked.
  - natep 15y ago
    It's not about whether hackathons should have female waitresses. It's about whether "women" should be listed as perks right under massages. And for what was supposed to be a professional event (in the eyes of its sponsors and potential audience at least), the answer is a clear "No." And regarding the slippery slope you tried to construct, I don't think there is one, unless you are a moral relativist. Anyone that thinks anyone else is wrong should be able to tell them so (or fire them if it's an at-will situation[1] or part of the contract). If it turns out the majority (or those that are the most vocal) are wrong, then I can only hope that the right opinion will win because of its rightness and/or the persuasiveness of its proponents. Will this situation inevitably lead towards a more moral, ethical society? No. Does it have the potential to categorically exclude/supress correct opinions? No. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/At-will_employment http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/At-will_employment
cabalamat 15y ago
> He is entitled to think whatever, include slavery or the annihilation of mankind, and people should not only not put him in prison for it, but not even fire him for it. If someone wants to kill me and everyone I care about, then surely it is reasonable for me to be somewhat irate at that person, up to and including choosing not to do business with them.

by batista 15y ago

i_cannot_hack 15y ago

> Why something that's ok for, say, a casino or a sports bar (female waitresses) is bad for a hackathon? Because a coding marathon should be for both sexes? Well, aren't casinos for both sexes too? How come they get to have women waitresses? Also, who said the organizers of this PARTICULAR hackathon want it to be? I think it has a lot to do with expectations. People held the hackaton to a higher standard than, for example, a strip club, and therefore they are a lot more vocal about it when the organizers fail to live up to what was expected of them. > Is it that they SHOULD want it to be? Is the message that one cannot organize an event the way he likes it, provided he doesn't do anything illegal? They have all the rights in the world to organize a hackathon the way they want it, but that also means that the general public has all the rights in the world to dislike it, i.e be outraged.

batista 15y ago
I think it has a lot to do with expectations. People held the hackaton to a higher standard than, for example, a strip club, and therefore they are a lot more vocal about it when the organizers fail to live up to what was expected of them. Maybe. For me a hackathon is a pointless thing, like a "machismo" competition for nerds. They have all the rights in the world to organize a hackathon the way they want it, but that also means that the general public has all the rights in the world to dislike it, i.e be outraged. Well, with that I fully agree.

samth 15y ago

So one is only allowed to have the "right" opinions? I think it's pretty obvious that everyone should try to have correct ideas. For example, if you think that Mac OS X is the world's most widely-used desktop OS, then you are wrong, and you should revise your thinking on the subject. Similarly, if you think that IP guarantees reliable delivery, you should think something else, because you're not right. Thinking that it's ok to make people slaves because of the color of their skin (or any other reason) is also wrong, and if you think that (I assume no one on HN does), you should revise your thinking on the subject. Saying, at work, that you think your coworkers should be made into slaves seems like a pretty obvious firing offense to me. As for whether an event can be both legal and a bad thing, I think it's pretty obvious that something can -- imagine I organized an event to write patches with backdoors for the linux kernel. If you said you were going to organize an event like that, I would say that you shouldn't do it.

batista 15y ago
> I think it's pretty obvious that everyone should try to have correct ideas. For example, if you think that Mac OS X is the world's most widely-used desktop OS, then you are wrong, and you should revise your thinking on the subject. Similarly, if you think that IP guarantees reliable delivery, you should think something else, because you're not right. That about factual correctness. Another ballgame altogether. Whether a hackathon should have female waitresses or not is an ethical/moral issue. In any case, not something that can be objectively counted and checked.
- natep 15y ago
  It's not about whether hackathons should have female waitresses. It's about whether "women" should be listed as perks right under massages. And for what was supposed to be a professional event (in the eyes of its sponsors and potential audience at least), the answer is a clear "No." And regarding the slippery slope you tried to construct, I don't think there is one, unless you are a moral relativist. Anyone that thinks anyone else is wrong should be able to tell them so (or fire them if it's an at-will situation[1] or part of the contract). If it turns out the majority (or those that are the most vocal) are wrong, then I can only hope that the right opinion will win because of its rightness and/or the persuasiveness of its proponents. Will this situation inevitably lead towards a more moral, ethical society? No. Does it have the potential to categorically exclude/supress correct opinions? No. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/At-will_employment http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/At-will_employment

cabalamat 15y ago

> He is entitled to think whatever, include slavery or the annihilation of mankind, and people should not only not put him in prison for it, but not even fire him for it. If someone wants to kill me and everyone I care about, then surely it is reasonable for me to be somewhat irate at that person, up to and including choosing not to do business with them.