News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:In defence of Douglas Crockford by IsaacL on Sunday September 04, 2016 @04:32PM (#12426554)
Dude, dude, dude, you've almost identified the real issue here (interpreting everything as harassment for the sake of an agenda), and then gone off onto wild elaborate tangents about social status and evolutionary biology.

Look at the actual people who incite these campaigns (e.g., https://twitter.com/nexxylove/status/771503661956501504).

"Don't bother to examine a folly, ask yourself only what it accomplishes". These people have a laser-focused sensitivity on actions which make certain groups feel unwelcome. They can't be unaware of the messages they themselves are sending. Who are they trying to make feel unwelcome?

Re:In defence of Douglas Crockford by PavlovsCat on Wednesday September 07, 2016 @08:02AM (#12442580)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tBRGMcdAKzs&t=13m15s

"I have a theory, feel free to prove me wrong by "kicking out" "toxic actors", I dare you".

The sad part is, I think she does have a point. People who treat each other decently might soon enough LEARN to be great coders, while being good at something is really no excuse to be a dick. Not that I think Crockford is one, but generally speaking; the better you are, the more polite you ought to be towards "little ones", or you're an asshole. But the whole logic of let's prove it by assuming it's true, with ZERO thought given to what to do if it turns out wrong, is just one gaping wound of a brainfart, I'm just astonished. I'm not not just saying that to be snarky: it does remind me of things Hannah Arendt wrote about totalitarian propaganda, e.g. someone is declared as unfit to live and then killed, proving the theory correct, with some pseudo-scientific, pseudo-compassionate babble on the side. Oh, but they're "just" declaring people as non-existing for them and any decent person, so that's different, right? Well, not different enough to be acceptable. One way in which it is the SAME is that the words are just a bunch of hot air and sophistry, the standards are all double - it's all about the action, the movement, the in-group. You don't have to build concentration camps for there to be something deeply wrong with that.

> They can't be unaware of the messages they themselves are sending.

Oh, as foot soldiers of course they can be unaware. Between https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_projection and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect there isn't anything anyone cannot get themselves to believe.

Re:In defence of Douglas Crockford by curioussavage on Monday September 05, 2016 @01:45AM (#12428369)
Oh my goodness they actually have a tweet about the weak map statement!! https://twitter.com/nodebotanist/status/512891046192504832

I thought it was a joke, I mean... its almost funny now.