3 ms·

My background: I have spoken at OSCON, SXSW, Webstock, RailsConf, and more -- venues shared with Kathy Sierra -- and I have been an OSCON organizer, and I was b

My background: I have spoken at OSCON, SXSW, Webstock, RailsConf, and more -- venues shared with Kathy Sierra -- and I have been an OSCON organizer, and I was behind the creation of the new "People" track. I am a programmer, and a usability expert. Allow me to respond to your points: A) she doesn't pretend to speak as a programmer B) her stuff is not generic PR & marketing, it's about user engagement and results in concrete recommendations about the business of building software, AND C) she cites psychological research, not marketing handbooks (she's pretty damn current too, the lady does her homework) D) she doesn't name drop or publicity whore, podcast, screencast, chum up to people for photos or videos, or write product reviews (unlike Scobl E) she actually made her career with the invention of the redonkulously succcessful Head First book series, and that is why she is paid to speak -- tech books sell like ass... except hers (and Missing Manual, another O'Reilly line) F) Her talks are a bit repetitive, but I wasn't aware that giving the same talk (slightly updated) a few different times was reason for death threats to be acceptable. Would I have reacted in the same manner? No, but then again, I'm not Kathy Sierra, I am a 24-year-old girl who grew up online, and don't even have a hamster to worry about much less a teenaged daughter. I simply cannot fathom the ridiculousness of accusing Kathy of "vapid self-promotion" (totally unfounded) and basically suggesting that she was asking for it. It has "socially disabled adolescent boy" written all over it. Just like the original "griefing" and threats.

ahoyhere 18y ago
For what it's worth, the origin of "griefing" is not found in the value (or lack thereof) of a person's conference talks. If that were the case, then just about every conference speaker would get "griefed" this way, because speakers are uniformly unprepared, unrehearsed, completely unaware of the separation of "What I want to say" and "what my audience wants to hear," incapable of making it 3 sentences without stuttering, couldn't design a legible slide to save their hides, and leave the audience wondering where the hell their 45 minutes have gone. It is arrogance, it is disrespect, and it is absolutely fucking unprofessional. It's also universal. No, it comes from a feeling of insecurity. You get somebody towards whom "everyone" feels warmly disposed (like Kathy), and the people on the fringes -- who feel their own brilliance is being ignored -- hate this interloper, who adds no value, who isn't even one of us for fuck's sake! And people like him/her! Act as if they are god's gift to whatever! Out comes the viciousness. I've experienced this myself. I've never received death threats, but I did have my own personal troll, who'd come into the framework IRC channel and flood it with nasty, nasty things, making it impossible for me or anyone else to hold a conversation, and photoshop my pictures in rude ways. I know who did it -- prominent people. These were smart, smart guys. They had a lot going for them. But in their eyes, it was a valuable use of their time to harrass a 20yo girl who wrote some tutorials that people loved. You have to question the ultimate utility of a person who'd rather harrass some person who's off doing his/her own thing, rather than creating more great shit. Now me, I am nothing if not ballsy. I know who these people are, but I never bothered to tell them I knew. Now they both treat me with respect, even like me and use my ideas for their stuff. All the while, I quietly prove that I am the better man. But I do not think that being ballsy makes me a better person than someone who is not ballsy.
- yters 18y ago
  You mention they are smart people. Do you mean there is a utilitarian motive to griefing, at least in the large scale cases? Effective trolling seems to efficiently polarize issues. When something is polarized it becomes much more discrete and easier to manage. That's why partisan politics do better than third options or bipartisanship.
  - ahoyhere 18y ago
    What "issue" do you think they could be "polarizing", given my description above?
    - yters 18y ago
      That comment was aimed at a general purpose behind trolling. As for Kathy Sierra I don't know anything the issue, but I can make up something. Say these people represent the status quo for tutorials. Sierra starts a whole new way of doing tutorials. What she does is also create a space for other new competitors to emerge, i.e. there are now a number of new ideas that can be combined in unique ways. This threatens to take even more market share from the original publishers. So, they polarize public opinion in regard to Sierra and her detractors. Now, no one looks at combining ideas from either party, just one or the other. Emerging market effectively eliminated. Additionally, the emerging market can no longer give momentum to Sierra's efforts. So, this indirectly damages Sierra's market too.
      - ahoyhere 18y ago
        "I don't know anything the issue, but I can make up something." Glad to hear it.
- blasdel 18y ago
  "You get somebody towards whom "everyone" feels warmly disposed (like Kathy), and the people on the fringes -- who feel their own brilliance is being ignored -- hate this interloper, who adds no value, who isn't even one of us for fuck's sake! And people like him/her! Act as if they are god's gift to whatever!" You understand! You're right that the attacks come from insecurity -- but the insecurity is not rooted in "I'm being ignored", it's "the emperor has no clothes!". They can't see a way to make an honest non-anon criticism: the target wouldn't accept it, and the fawning crowd would lynch him. "How the hell is this person ever going to find out that not everyone thinks they're hot shit?" races through their feverish mind. Taking a few seconds to send them some anonymous vitriol will sure alert them to the fact that they are pissing someone off!
blasdel 18y ago
she cites psychological research -- except that it's the Gladwell/Surowiecki affirmative self-help for New Yorker readers kind of research. She is certainly nowhere near as bad as Scoble: only Winer can keep him company in the innermost circle of blog hell. I had totally erased that damn Head First Design Patterns book from my memory, maybe she does belong in an inner circle of hell...
- ahoyhere 18y ago
  > * except that it's the Gladwell/Surowiecki affirmative self-help for New Yorker readers* I'd like to see you back that statement up. I subscribe to the cogsci, psych, creativity, metaphor and memory journals online. I know what stuff she cites.

ahoyhere 18y ago

For what it's worth, the origin of "griefing" is not found in the value (or lack thereof) of a person's conference talks. If that were the case, then just about every conference speaker would get "griefed" this way, because speakers are uniformly unprepared, unrehearsed, completely unaware of the separation of "What I want to say" and "what my audience wants to hear," incapable of making it 3 sentences without stuttering, couldn't design a legible slide to save their hides, and leave the audience wondering where the hell their 45 minutes have gone. It is arrogance, it is disrespect, and it is absolutely fucking unprofessional. It's also universal. No, it comes from a feeling of insecurity. You get somebody towards whom "everyone" feels warmly disposed (like Kathy), and the people on the fringes -- who feel their own brilliance is being ignored -- hate this interloper, who adds no value, who isn't even one of us for fuck's sake! And people like him/her! Act as if they are god's gift to whatever! Out comes the viciousness. I've experienced this myself. I've never received death threats, but I did have my own personal troll, who'd come into the framework IRC channel and flood it with nasty, nasty things, making it impossible for me or anyone else to hold a conversation, and photoshop my pictures in rude ways. I know who did it -- prominent people. These were smart, smart guys. They had a lot going for them. But in their eyes, it was a valuable use of their time to harrass a 20yo girl who wrote some tutorials that people loved. You have to question the ultimate utility of a person who'd rather harrass some person who's off doing his/her own thing, rather than creating more great shit. Now me, I am nothing if not ballsy. I know who these people are, but I never bothered to tell them I knew. Now they both treat me with respect, even like me and use my ideas for their stuff. All the while, I quietly prove that I am the better man. But I do not think that being ballsy makes me a better person than someone who is not ballsy.

yters 18y ago
You mention they are smart people. Do you mean there is a utilitarian motive to griefing, at least in the large scale cases? Effective trolling seems to efficiently polarize issues. When something is polarized it becomes much more discrete and easier to manage. That's why partisan politics do better than third options or bipartisanship.
- ahoyhere 18y ago
  What "issue" do you think they could be "polarizing", given my description above?
  - yters 18y ago
    That comment was aimed at a general purpose behind trolling. As for Kathy Sierra I don't know anything the issue, but I can make up something. Say these people represent the status quo for tutorials. Sierra starts a whole new way of doing tutorials. What she does is also create a space for other new competitors to emerge, i.e. there are now a number of new ideas that can be combined in unique ways. This threatens to take even more market share from the original publishers. So, they polarize public opinion in regard to Sierra and her detractors. Now, no one looks at combining ideas from either party, just one or the other. Emerging market effectively eliminated. Additionally, the emerging market can no longer give momentum to Sierra's efforts. So, this indirectly damages Sierra's market too.
    - ahoyhere 18y ago
      "I don't know anything the issue, but I can make up something." Glad to hear it.
blasdel 18y ago
"You get somebody towards whom "everyone" feels warmly disposed (like Kathy), and the people on the fringes -- who feel their own brilliance is being ignored -- hate this interloper, who adds no value, who isn't even one of us for fuck's sake! And people like him/her! Act as if they are god's gift to whatever!" You understand! You're right that the attacks come from insecurity -- but the insecurity is not rooted in "I'm being ignored", it's "the emperor has no clothes!". They can't see a way to make an honest non-anon criticism: the target wouldn't accept it, and the fawning crowd would lynch him. "How the hell is this person ever going to find out that not everyone thinks they're hot shit?" races through their feverish mind. Taking a few seconds to send them some anonymous vitriol will sure alert them to the fact that they are pissing someone off!

blasdel 18y ago

she cites psychological research -- except that it's the Gladwell/Surowiecki affirmative self-help for New Yorker readers kind of research. She is certainly nowhere near as bad as Scoble: only Winer can keep him company in the innermost circle of blog hell. I had totally erased that damn Head First Design Patterns book from my memory, maybe she does belong in an inner circle of hell...

ahoyhere 18y ago
> * except that it's the Gladwell/Surowiecki affirmative self-help for New Yorker readers* I'd like to see you back that statement up. I subscribe to the cogsci, psych, creativity, metaphor and memory journals online. I know what stuff she cites.