News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Our fundamental right to shame and shun the New York Times by krageon on Wednesday March 23, 2022 @11:38AM (#30779591)
They accomplish it because the folks around them are normal human beings that don't completely fly off the handle when something they don't like is said by someone else. You talk about it, rib back or leave. It's not rocket science.
Re:Our fundamental right to shame and shun the New York Times by otterley on Wednesday March 23, 2022 @12:15PM (#30780026)
That's possible, but a more likely explanation is that most people know better than to make inappropriate jokes about their colleagues. In my 30-year-long career, the number of people I've observed making such jokes is far outweighed by the number of people who maintain a professional demeanor.
Re:Our fundamental right to shame and shun the New York Times by mbrodersen on Wednesday March 23, 2022 @09:35PM (#30785593)
Let me give you an example: Let’s say (for arguments sake) that I got upset reading your comment. Following your logic it is now your fault that I am upset. So you need to change your behaviour until I am no longer upset. Can you see how impractical/impossible that is? Any opinion you have might upset somebody. So the only way to not upset anybody is to stay silent.
Re:Our fundamental right to shame and shun the New York Times by otterley on Thursday March 24, 2022 @04:02PM (#30794683)
You're not following my logic, because it's not what I said, or what I mean. We're talking specifically about off-color jokes about work colleagues, not factual statements like "I ate an apple" or uncontroversial personal opinions like "I like cheese."
Re:Our fundamental right to shame and shun the New York Times by mbrodersen on Saturday March 26, 2022 @11:09PM (#30817404)
“I like cheese” will be offensive and perhaps upsetting to some vegans. So better not talk about food at work. The same with pretty much any subject you can think of. Making the work environment or any other environment non-upsetting to everybody at all time is impossible. Somebody gets promoted instead of you: now you are upset. So let’s ban promoting people. The CEO makes 1000x more money than you while golfing every day? That upsets a lot of people. So let’s ban that. Some people are better dresses than you at work. How upsetting. Let’s all wear identical clothes. I could go on. But that might upset somebody somewhere.
Re:Our fundamental right to shame and shun the New York Times by BolexNOLA on Sunday March 27, 2022 @09:21AM (#30820008)
I get why this “could” happen but I find it hard to believe you think that’s how things shake out even 1% of the time. You’re spiking the conversation with a vaguely-slippery-slope argument rooted in niche theoretical scenarios.
Re:Our fundamental right to shame and shun the New York Times by mbrodersen on Sunday March 27, 2022 @09:20PM (#30825991)
Not at all. I have experienced co-workers getting upset over things like that. Leading to heated arguments and bad feelings. My point is that what you happens to think is offensive and what isn’t does not match what others find offensive. So trying to ban everything that might offend somebody somewhere will lead to everything being banned. It won’t just be your particular pet ban list.
Re:Our fundamental right to shame and shun the New York Times by mbrodersen on Wednesday March 23, 2022 @09:27PM (#30785548)
Yep exactly. Insisting that the world has to change so that you don’t get upset is crazy.
Re:Our fundamental right to shame and shun the New York Times by BolexNOLA on Wednesday March 23, 2022 @01:42PM (#30781146)
I just don't know how you can say things like this when professional environments like Activision-Blizzard exist. You act like it's either "everything we say can be said without any social consequence" or "everyone is offended by everything all the time," when the reality is it's a sliding scale based on context.

I have a higher tolerance for things with a small group of friends than I do in the workplace. I will talk about religion, politics, get heated/passionate, etc. in a friend-context. I do NOT want that at work, and I think I am entitled to a workplace where people have to self-censor a bit in an effort to keep the peace. I do it every day around conservatives who get their feathers ruffled if I say something bad about the GOP/Trump, what makes them so special that they can talk about whatever they want whenever they want and expect NO social repercussions?

It's a one-way street with people who behave like that, we all know it. I guarantee you I can offend and get a bad reaction out of anyone who says "anything goes."

Re:Our fundamental right to shame and shun the New York Times by krageon on Thursday March 24, 2022 @04:59AM (#30787553)
> I just don't know how you can say things like this when professional environments like Activision-Blizzard exist

You don't agree people should leave Activision-Blizzard? I'm not convinced all the drama actually improved the company, though it was probably very satisfying to see for some folks.

> I do NOT want that at work, and I think I am entitled to [...]

That's a valid feeling, but nobody else is obliged to give that to you. You find a company that works for you, or you adapt to the one that you want to work for you. You don't go to war with the culture of a company just because something you feel entitled to isn't yet there.

> I guarantee you I can offend and get a bad reaction out of anyone who says "anything goes."

Yes, and there's nothing wrong with bad reactions. I literally said "you talk about it, rib back or leave". If you are incapable of solving your issues that way and find some sort of middle ground when someone really feels you stepped over the line, I think you have some growing up to do. That said, I recognise it doesn't mesh with a lot of folks' feelings on the matter and that's fine. I can live with that. I hope you can too.

I think it's reasonable to have conversations like these at work. Just like you can have them anywhere else. If conversations about it are had and you have thoughts on whether or not they should be had, you should be heard. Then the other party is free to do with that what they want. That's how life works.

Re:Our fundamental right to shame and shun the New York Times by BolexNOLA on Thursday March 24, 2022 @12:27PM (#30792112)
>That's a valid feeling, but nobody else is obliged to give that to you. You find a company that works for you, or you adapt to the one that you want to work for you. You don't go to war with the culture of a company just because something you feel entitled to isn't yet there.

No, I am entitled to that. I am there to do a job, not put up with someone's ravings about politics or whatever. I am forced into a space with them 40+ hours a week, my choice to remove myself from their presence has been taken way from me.

It is the company's responsibility to not foster a hostile work environment or one where people are constantly uncomfortable. If I have a colleague constantly going off on political rants and/or interacting with me in a different (unprofessional) manner at work it is the company's problem as well.

Re:Our fundamental right to shame and shun the New York Times by krageon on Friday March 25, 2022 @06:42AM (#30800513)
> [...] it is the company's problem as well.

Respectfully, I think with these paragraphs you've established that in this situation it's primarily your problem. The environment was there before you came around and clearly it worked well enough to keep things afloat, so unless you are the one person on earth with the skills you have it is not the company's problem.

Re:Our fundamental right to shame and shun the New York Times by BolexNOLA on Friday March 25, 2022 @10:17AM (#30802445)
Respectfully, it is primarily the company’s problem by law.

https://www.techrepublic.com/article/hostile-work-environmen...

Re:Our fundamental right to shame and shun the New York Times by krageon on Monday March 28, 2022 @03:30AM (#30828059)
Laws only matter when they are enforced, and these ones are clearly not.