4 ms·

This is a touchy subject. I think this kind of behavior is very counterproductive and we (programmers) seem to do it a lot. It's something that needs to be talk

This is a touchy subject. I think this kind of behavior is very counterproductive and we (programmers) seem to do it a lot. It's something that needs to be talked about and fixed. Miguel de Icaza wrote a great blog post about "well-actuallys" a year ago and it's definitely worth reading: http://tirania.org/blog/archive/2011/Feb-17.html http://tirania.org/blog/archive/2011/Feb-17.html That being said, it makes me uncomfortable that an article called "Why you shouldn't invite Yehuda Katz to your user group meeting" near the top of HN, especially because he seems to have become a bit of a punching bag lately (see Rails.app). I really wish we as a community spent less time dragging people down, especially ones who contribute so much great code. This shouldn't be about Yehuda. This should be about all of us being nicer and better people. It's sad to see an opportunity for discussion be used to bring down one person.

kaiuhl 14y ago
I totally agree. What doesn't get mentioned in the OP is just how incorrect the presentation was. If I was a ruby newbie, I'd want someone to stand up and say why the presentation, which was surely being presented as truth, was actually incorrect. In addition, publicly berating Yehuda seems really pointless given his huge contributions to our community. Let's be nice.
- davidbalbert 14y ago
  I think programmers generally care too much about correctness at the expense of feelings, community, and personal relationships. Very often correcting someone is really about showing how smart you are. While I wasn't at the event in the article, it certainly seems that Yehuda could have been doing that, and he shouldn't have done it. I just don't think this is a productive way to fix the problem.
  - quanticle 14y ago
    I think programmers generally care too much about correctness at the expense of feelings, community, and personal relationships. Maybe. Or, maybe like other engineers we care more about having things that work than your hurt feelings. In Inviting Disaster [1], Chiles talks about how the most successful engineering cultures don't cover up mistakes. They expose them and correct them at the earliest possible instance. This does sometimes require people to have a thick skin. It's not comfortable to realize that you're wrong. But, frankly, I'd much rather be correct than comfortable. Of course, this doesn't mean that you should personally attack the person who's wrong. But, from the article, that's exactly what happened. Ms. Selle doesn't say that Mr. Katz personally attacked the presenter. She just said that he questioned the presenter's methods and approach. I think that's entirely valid. I see it at scientific conferences all the time. I do agree that interrupting the presenter was uncalled for. Mr. Katz should have reserved his questions until the presenter was done speaking. But I don't think he was incorrect in asking the questions that he did. [1]: http://www.amazon.com/Inviting-Disaster-Lessons-From-Technology/dp/0066620821/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1334249266&sr=8-1 http://www.amazon.com/Inviting-Disaster-Lessons-From-Technol... EDIT: accidentally forgot link
- slantyyz 14y ago
  This isn't a simple binary decision of "yes, correct the presenter" or "no, don't correct the presenter"". What you're ignoring is that Katz could have timed his criticism better. Katz could have simply been polite and let the speaker finish the presentation and then do a point-by-point breakdown of what his issues were with the talk AFTER the presentation was done. The audience in this case will still get the facts, so to speak. I don't know what the motivation of the speaker was to give the talk, but usually these presentations are well intentioned. Sometimes people just pick a topic they don't know about, do some research and then present their findings, as a means of learning themselves. We don't know what the situation was here. In any case, just let them finish, and then correct them. Is that so hard?
tptacek 14y ago
While I don't think I've ever managed to fully derail someone's presentation before, this is something I too am terrible about.
- davidbalbert 14y ago
  I do it a lot also. I try to catch myself, but I only succeed part of the time. One of the best things I've done was giving it a name thanks to Miguel's blog post. With a name, others can call me out for doing it ("did you just well-actually me?") and I can also call myself out ("sorry, that was a well-actually").
omgsean 14y ago
Agreed, this article would have been more effective if the author didn't disclose who he was talking about, and perhaps emailed Mr. Katz privately if he had a problem with his behaviour.
umjames 14y ago
I wasn't at the meeting. I could have gone, but decided not to. The only reason I can find for the OP to explicitly call out Yehuda is so that maybe he'll actually read the article and consider the advice it contains. If the article's intent was to bring attention to this type of behavior, then mission accomplished. I think the OP wishes she had taken a less passive approach to this when considering the sequence of events in retrospect. Sometimes, it's hard to be "in the moment", and only afterwards do you wish you said/did things differently. Truthfully, I wish she had said something about this to Yehuda right at the meeting, but after it was all said and done and not in front of everyone. However, I don't know how he would have taken it. I could see the situation getting uglier at that point. Hopefully, he can/will learn from this for the future. No one is beyond criticism. We all have things we could be better at.
httpitis 14y ago
Well said. Upvote on me, Sir.
ryankshaw 14y ago
I agree. I find it ironic that a post that attempts tell us all how to be kinder to each other and invokes the words of "How to win friends" would call someone out by name in a public forum. Even if the author was doing it to "make sure that he saw it so you could teach him a lesson", just saying "Last night at Philly.rb, a guy was giving a presentation on meta programming and he was rudely interrupted by another programmer. Lets talk about why this kind of behavior is bad" would have been enough. It would have been a good thing for all of us that have the same tendency to hear, and wycats could have seen it and said "oh, my bad, I can see how that wasn't very nice" without being called out infront of his peers.

kaiuhl 14y ago

I totally agree. What doesn't get mentioned in the OP is just how incorrect the presentation was. If I was a ruby newbie, I'd want someone to stand up and say why the presentation, which was surely being presented as truth, was actually incorrect. In addition, publicly berating Yehuda seems really pointless given his huge contributions to our community. Let's be nice.

davidbalbert 14y ago
I think programmers generally care too much about correctness at the expense of feelings, community, and personal relationships. Very often correcting someone is really about showing how smart you are. While I wasn't at the event in the article, it certainly seems that Yehuda could have been doing that, and he shouldn't have done it. I just don't think this is a productive way to fix the problem.
- quanticle 14y ago
  I think programmers generally care too much about correctness at the expense of feelings, community, and personal relationships. Maybe. Or, maybe like other engineers we care more about having things that work than your hurt feelings. In Inviting Disaster [1], Chiles talks about how the most successful engineering cultures don't cover up mistakes. They expose them and correct them at the earliest possible instance. This does sometimes require people to have a thick skin. It's not comfortable to realize that you're wrong. But, frankly, I'd much rather be correct than comfortable. Of course, this doesn't mean that you should personally attack the person who's wrong. But, from the article, that's exactly what happened. Ms. Selle doesn't say that Mr. Katz personally attacked the presenter. She just said that he questioned the presenter's methods and approach. I think that's entirely valid. I see it at scientific conferences all the time. I do agree that interrupting the presenter was uncalled for. Mr. Katz should have reserved his questions until the presenter was done speaking. But I don't think he was incorrect in asking the questions that he did. [1]: http://www.amazon.com/Inviting-Disaster-Lessons-From-Technology/dp/0066620821/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1334249266&sr=8-1 http://www.amazon.com/Inviting-Disaster-Lessons-From-Technol... EDIT: accidentally forgot link
slantyyz 14y ago
This isn't a simple binary decision of "yes, correct the presenter" or "no, don't correct the presenter"". What you're ignoring is that Katz could have timed his criticism better. Katz could have simply been polite and let the speaker finish the presentation and then do a point-by-point breakdown of what his issues were with the talk AFTER the presentation was done. The audience in this case will still get the facts, so to speak. I don't know what the motivation of the speaker was to give the talk, but usually these presentations are well intentioned. Sometimes people just pick a topic they don't know about, do some research and then present their findings, as a means of learning themselves. We don't know what the situation was here. In any case, just let them finish, and then correct them. Is that so hard?

tptacek 14y ago

While I don't think I've ever managed to fully derail someone's presentation before, this is something I too am terrible about.

davidbalbert 14y ago
I do it a lot also. I try to catch myself, but I only succeed part of the time. One of the best things I've done was giving it a name thanks to Miguel's blog post. With a name, others can call me out for doing it ("did you just well-actually me?") and I can also call myself out ("sorry, that was a well-actually").

omgsean 14y ago

Agreed, this article would have been more effective if the author didn't disclose who he was talking about, and perhaps emailed Mr. Katz privately if he had a problem with his behaviour.

umjames 14y ago

I wasn't at the meeting. I could have gone, but decided not to. The only reason I can find for the OP to explicitly call out Yehuda is so that maybe he'll actually read the article and consider the advice it contains. If the article's intent was to bring attention to this type of behavior, then mission accomplished. I think the OP wishes she had taken a less passive approach to this when considering the sequence of events in retrospect. Sometimes, it's hard to be "in the moment", and only afterwards do you wish you said/did things differently. Truthfully, I wish she had said something about this to Yehuda right at the meeting, but after it was all said and done and not in front of everyone. However, I don't know how he would have taken it. I could see the situation getting uglier at that point. Hopefully, he can/will learn from this for the future. No one is beyond criticism. We all have things we could be better at.

httpitis 14y ago

Well said. Upvote on me, Sir.

ryankshaw 14y ago

I agree. I find it ironic that a post that attempts tell us all how to be kinder to each other and invokes the words of "How to win friends" would call someone out by name in a public forum. Even if the author was doing it to "make sure that he saw it so you could teach him a lesson", just saying "Last night at Philly.rb, a guy was giving a presentation on meta programming and he was rudely interrupted by another programmer. Lets talk about why this kind of behavior is bad" would have been enough. It would have been a good thing for all of us that have the same tendency to hear, and wycats could have seen it and said "oh, my bad, I can see how that wasn't very nice" without being called out infront of his peers.