Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
Welcome to the Monastery
 
PerlMonks  

Re^2: How many man-hours would you estimate you have invested in learning Perl?

by schwern (Scribe)
on Apr 09, 2013 at 19:52 UTC ( #1027829=note: print w/ replies, xml ) Need Help??


in reply to Re: How many man-hours would you estimate you have invested in learning Perl?
in thread How many man-hours would you estimate you have invested in learning Perl?

This is a fantastic example of Attack By Apology. We have all the attributes...

  • Not recognizing that someone was hurt.
  • Using the opportunity to inflict more hurt.
  • Using the opportunity to drive the agenda behind their "joke".
  • No showing of understanding.
  • Treating the incident like a joke.
  • No acceptance of responsibility for the consequences of their action.
  • Attempted derailment.
  • Claiming it's part of diversity to accept their attacks on others.

I'm glad the PerlMonks leadership has gotten involved and asked the author to respond, however they should have read it before they allowed it to be posted. It has given the offender another opportunity to attack.

I do not accept the author's response, it's just another attack. It underlines why the poll is not "just a joke" but is a hurtful reflection of the author's politics and philosophy. It does not belong on the front page of PerlMonks. It has nothing to do with Perl or Perl Wisdom.

I ask the PerlMonks leadership to take further public action.


Comment on Re^2: How many man-hours would you estimate you have invested in learning Perl?
Re^3: How many man-hours would you estimate you have invested in learning Perl?
by Anonymous Monk on Apr 10, 2013 at 09:45 UTC

    I ask the PerlMonks leadership to take further public action.

    Well, you're kinda asking in the wrong place

Re^3: How many man-hours would you estimate you have invested in learning Perl?
by Anonymous Monk on Apr 10, 2013 at 12:16 UTC
    Wait a minute - the OP may have made a joke that identified no particular person, or even any particular group, and which, interpreted through a certain lens, could possibly offend some people's sensitivities.

    But the response that started all this was a direct attack on the OP - labelling his/her personal sense of humour as agression, and further attacking all male members of the Perl community with the assertion that they are all, by error of birth, saddled with a privilege they must spend their lives being careful to renounce - deny the very persons they were born as - so important is it that certain other people's sensitivities not be ruffled.

    But that's just fine in other people's eyes?

    'Cause, parsed, the message of many of these posts is essentially that all the men on here need to watch their step, lest the self-appointed values-police get miffed over any perceived lack of due deference to their sensitivities.

    Oh, that's much less offensive than the OP. (not).

Re^3: How many man-hours would you estimate you have invested in learning Perl?
by Anonymous Monk on Apr 10, 2013 at 12:19 UTC
    Wait a minute - the OP may have made a joke that identified no particular person, or even any particular group, and which, interpreted through a certain lens, could possibly offend some people's sensitivities.

    But the response that started all this was a direct attack on the OP - labelling his/her personal sense of humour as agression, and further attacking all male members of the Perl community with the assertion that they are all, by error of birth, saddled with a privilege they must spend their lives being careful to renounce - deny the very persons they were born as - so important is it that certain other people's sensitivities not be ruffled.

    But that's just fine in other people's eyes?

    'Cause, parsed, the message of many of these posts is essentially that all the men on here need to spend their lives denying who they are and watching their step, lest the self-appointed values-police get miffed over any perceived lack of due deference to their sensitivities.

    Oh, that's much less offensive than the OP. (not).

      I said I was offended by the statement, and that it was a joke in poor taste.

      I did not say "punch_card_don is terrible". I said "I think this joke is really crappy, and I question his judgement in making it; I think it makes us look really bad to promote this joke to every page, and I really think we should take it down and not defend it so we don't look worse."

      Let me make it clear here as I have done elsewhere on this page: No one here is intrinsically bad.

      Is this clear? punch_card_don is not a bad person. He made a call to tell a joke that is one that the Ethics Guidelines at most places I've worked at would say was a "come into my office, we need to talk" issue. Still not a bad person.

      The people who have been passing out flames and epithets are not bad people. They are behaving in an immature and ill-mannered way, yes - but that is a "do", not an "is". They themselves are not intrinsically bad people. Not making the most grown-up call, but not a bad person.

      I let myself show my anger, and I posted some sarcastic and angry words. But I'm not a bad person for doing that. I didn't live up to my own standards, and I apologize to anyone that felt I was unfair to them. I will try very hard not to repeat that, and I will appreciate a reminder if I do repeat it.

      Knowing you're not a bad person, however, is not a license to say whatever you like to whoever you want without consequence to your reputation, which is the sum of what your current actions imply about your future ones to others. Your behavior and yourself are separate items, but your behavior and your reputation are tightly bound together. (This may already be self-evident to everyone; the fact that most of the statements that came down to "feminism is bad and you're bad and stupid" came from the Anonymous Monk shows that there's at least an basic realization of this by even those with the poorest impulse control.)

      To boil allof this down: None of the actions here were specifically designed to cause harm. I think there have been some very poor judgements made as to whether particular actions were truly harmless and just fun, or not. There were certainly some choices to make deliberately unkind and unsympathetic choices. Whether or not any or all of these damage the reputation of individuals and/or Perlmonks is currently unknowable.

      There have been uncaring, hostile, sneering, and incoherent actions, and indulging in those is bad behavior, and a community that wants to grow should be discouraging and disavowing that - but the people involved are in general are not bad people. (Some of the more crazypants stuff I'm not sure about. You should be cautious about letting that anger and meanness become too strong; not being able to resist exploding in anger and meanness can turn you into a bad person. We don't want that to happen to you. Seriously, we really don't.)

      "So what can I do to help make Perl an in-demand language so I get the maximum return on my investment?"

      Part of that is making sure that every person who even just wanders by feels like the community is tremendously glad to have them, and that we're interested in what they care about, and that we'll help if we can. If there's friction, we won't look away from it or reject it, but say, "There's an issue. We are creative. Let's create a solution that doesn't have to be win/lose."

      Honestly this thread is waaaaayy too hilarious.

      The "joke" rests on the general theory that there are, as someone put it "shrill, humourless, agenda-driven flakes" out there who are so steeped in their own culture of victimhood that they cannot let any perceived slight pass without making a federal case out of it.

      This thread goes a long way to confirming the well-founded assumption of that joke. Geez - they have a whole lexicon that has to be explained for ordinary people to understand, and their own wiki dictionary.

      Thank goodness cooler heads have chimed in to counter-balance the whining and not leave the impression that hiring a Perl programmer will mean having your discussions and meetings completely derailed by socio-political zealotry.

Re^3: How many man-hours would you estimate you have invested in learning Perl?
by Anonymous Monk on Apr 11, 2013 at 12:04 UTC
    Uh, once again, apparently some people see things in posts that simply aren't there. "Attack by Apology"? I see no hint of an apology in the post being referred to. I do not see a shifty attempt at justification, at all. After all the vitriol in this thread, you expected him to talk all warm and fuzzy and reprentant to you? Gosh some people seem to read things that simply aren't there and get upset about them.

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://1027829]
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others chanting in the Monastery: (11)
As of 2014-12-22 12:55 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?

    Is guessing a good strategy for surviving in the IT business?





    Results (117 votes), past polls