5 ms·

I can attest that it's unintentional. We roll pretty informally. And, frankly, we're pleased that anyone outside of the small (and insular) news apps community

I can attest that it's unintentional. We roll pretty informally. And, frankly, we're pleased that anyone outside of the small (and insular) news apps community is reading about our setup.

stcredzero 14y ago
> We roll pretty informally. And, frankly, we're pleased that anyone outside of the small (and insular) news apps community is reading about our setup. If only there was this network kind of thing that people all over the world could use to find and read such text...
pifflesnort 14y ago
> We roll pretty informally. Between the swearing, and the grossly informal dialog when explaining what should be rational and defensible technical choices: 1) I can tell. 2) It doesn't reflect [well on] NPR.
- endianswap 14y ago
  How does it not reflect well on NPR? I'm reading an employee's frank and open (both appreciated) blog post, am I supposed to feel put off because it says "shitty" in it?
  - pifflesnort 14y ago
    > How does it not reflect well on NPR? NPR advertises itself as "news & analysis", and in my experience, excels at both. A key component of "analysis" is the rational study, explanation, and discussion around (often complex and nuanced) topics. There are few topics as complex as that of software engineering, and it also warrants due consideration and analysis. To see engineers describing their emotive appeals as "how they roll" does not lead me to believe that NPR's hiring in their engineering department is on par with their hiring in the editorial department. As such, it reflects badly on their engineering department, and there is a strong implication that this is not somewhere that a studious engineer would choose to work. Contrast with the posts from Netflix on their architecture. Those posts are not unduly formal, but they provide logical, reasoned arguments, sufficient background as to judge their claims and conjecture, and demonstrate not only their own technical and engineering capacity, but their respect for the technical capacity of their reader.
    - marshray 14y ago
      Oh good grief.
    - rhizome 14y ago
      It's incredibly appropriate that this appeal to manners and social mores would be posted by someone calling themselves, "pifflesnort."
      - pifflesnort 14y ago
        It's an appeal to rational (rather than emotive) discourse, not arbitrary manners or social mores.
        rhizome 14y ago
        The prioritization of rationality over emotion (such as you use it) is a function of one's social framework, and the history of imposing the trappings of such onto others is pretty much the history of aristocracy.
        pifflesnort 14y ago
        That's an interesting rhetorical tack, but rationality over emotion is also pretty much the history of science, which is also closely tied with the history of aristocracy. Fortunately for all involved, we don't need to rope aristocracy or philosophy into the argument to provide some level of understanding of the qualitative nature of engineering, be it physical or digital. Instead, we have algorithms, maths/logic, and real measurements to serve as the bedrock of our field. Unfortunately, articles such as this one abandon that bedrock in favor of appeals to emotion, which leaves the article (and whatever conclusions it may ostensibly provide) unsupported by fact or logic. This loosely grounded approach to discussion is perfectly suited when discussing one's television preferences, but provides a net negative value to the world of technical discourse by propagating a culture of unsubstantiated and emotionally driven opinion and pop culture ideals.
  - prawn 14y ago
    Does "shitty" really still fall under the "swearing" umbrella?
- monatron 14y ago
  Who determines what the decorum for such a dialog should be? Does the informality effect in any way the rationality or defensibility of their choices? Why do people care? I'd much rather read an article in this tone rather than some stuffy technical blog like many other engineering teams sometimes put out.
  - pifflesnort 14y ago
    > Does the informality effect in any way the rationality or defensibility of their choices? Clarity in writing is not a stuffy affectation, but rather is the entire mechanism by which one both expresses an opinion, and provides an understandable, rational justification for that opinion. Without this, the reader is left with nothing but unsupported conjecture, opinion, and emotive appeals.
  - stcredzero 14y ago
    > Does the informality effect in any way the rationality or defensibility of their choices? This implicitly calls me a liar. As I stated above, the word choice and informality don't bother me. That they spent so little time thinking if the article would make sense to a random reader does. That goes against my expectations for NPR.
- kstop 14y ago
  You haven't spent much time in newsrooms, have you.

I can attest that it's unintentional. We roll pretty informally. And, frankly, we're pleased that anyone outside of the small (and insular) news apps community is reading about our setup.

stcredzero 14y ago

> We roll pretty informally. And, frankly, we're pleased that anyone outside of the small (and insular) news apps community is reading about our setup. If only there was this network kind of thing that people all over the world could use to find and read such text...

pifflesnort 14y ago

> We roll pretty informally. Between the swearing, and the grossly informal dialog when explaining what should be rational and defensible technical choices: 1) I can tell. 2) It doesn't reflect [well on] NPR.

endianswap 14y ago
How does it not reflect well on NPR? I'm reading an employee's frank and open (both appreciated) blog post, am I supposed to feel put off because it says "shitty" in it?
- pifflesnort 14y ago
  > How does it not reflect well on NPR? NPR advertises itself as "news & analysis", and in my experience, excels at both. A key component of "analysis" is the rational study, explanation, and discussion around (often complex and nuanced) topics. There are few topics as complex as that of software engineering, and it also warrants due consideration and analysis. To see engineers describing their emotive appeals as "how they roll" does not lead me to believe that NPR's hiring in their engineering department is on par with their hiring in the editorial department. As such, it reflects badly on their engineering department, and there is a strong implication that this is not somewhere that a studious engineer would choose to work. Contrast with the posts from Netflix on their architecture. Those posts are not unduly formal, but they provide logical, reasoned arguments, sufficient background as to judge their claims and conjecture, and demonstrate not only their own technical and engineering capacity, but their respect for the technical capacity of their reader.
  - marshray 14y ago
    Oh good grief.
  - rhizome 14y ago
    It's incredibly appropriate that this appeal to manners and social mores would be posted by someone calling themselves, "pifflesnort."
    - pifflesnort 14y ago
      It's an appeal to rational (rather than emotive) discourse, not arbitrary manners or social mores.
      - rhizome 14y ago
        The prioritization of rationality over emotion (such as you use it) is a function of one's social framework, and the history of imposing the trappings of such onto others is pretty much the history of aristocracy.
        pifflesnort 14y ago
        That's an interesting rhetorical tack, but rationality over emotion is also pretty much the history of science, which is also closely tied with the history of aristocracy. Fortunately for all involved, we don't need to rope aristocracy or philosophy into the argument to provide some level of understanding of the qualitative nature of engineering, be it physical or digital. Instead, we have algorithms, maths/logic, and real measurements to serve as the bedrock of our field. Unfortunately, articles such as this one abandon that bedrock in favor of appeals to emotion, which leaves the article (and whatever conclusions it may ostensibly provide) unsupported by fact or logic. This loosely grounded approach to discussion is perfectly suited when discussing one's television preferences, but provides a net negative value to the world of technical discourse by propagating a culture of unsubstantiated and emotionally driven opinion and pop culture ideals.
- prawn 14y ago
  Does "shitty" really still fall under the "swearing" umbrella?
monatron 14y ago
Who determines what the decorum for such a dialog should be? Does the informality effect in any way the rationality or defensibility of their choices? Why do people care? I'd much rather read an article in this tone rather than some stuffy technical blog like many other engineering teams sometimes put out.
- pifflesnort 14y ago
  > Does the informality effect in any way the rationality or defensibility of their choices? Clarity in writing is not a stuffy affectation, but rather is the entire mechanism by which one both expresses an opinion, and provides an understandable, rational justification for that opinion. Without this, the reader is left with nothing but unsupported conjecture, opinion, and emotive appeals.
- stcredzero 14y ago
  > Does the informality effect in any way the rationality or defensibility of their choices? This implicitly calls me a liar. As I stated above, the word choice and informality don't bother me. That they spent so little time thinking if the article would make sense to a random reader does. That goes against my expectations for NPR.
kstop 14y ago
You haven't spent much time in newsrooms, have you.