One guy (while looking at the presentation), turned his head to his buddy, and said - look at the size of that dongle, would you fork it?
Do you know what that is? It's Funny (and crude). And if you don't find it to be so, that's just too bad. You're not owed anything. You (nor anyone else) have been violated.
We are simply getting fed up that there are people so PC, so fragile, so venomous, so victimhood seeking, that they would attempt to drop a bomb on us over nothing.
> And guess what, her sentiment about racism, whether I agree with it or not, is shared by many scholars of American race relations who are decidedly more informed on the subject.
Redefining established words to fit your narrative (as someone said on here) is a crime against understanding and is not acceptable.
This is hardly a redefinition as much as a clarification of intent and context. Saying that it's a "crime against understanding" is a bit of an exaggeration.
I mean, saying that racism is "prejudice" is what Dictionary.com says, and saying racism is "prejudice with power" is what a sociologist says, then can't you figure it out with context? Dictionary.com says gravity is, "the force of attraction by which terrestrial bodies tend to fall toward the center of the earth." but a physicist would probably have a different definition they think is more accurate.
I definitely wouldn't say that Adria was right in this whole incident, but picking apart the rest of her Twitter history like it's some sort of way to establish how much you should dislike her is the wrong approach to making things better.
You're mixing up what I said: a sociologist describing a social phenomenon is analogous to a physicist describing a physical phenomenon.
In the tweet, Adria colloquially used the word "racism" in a way that's different from colloquial usage (she used the sociologist's definition and not the Dictionary.com definition), but that doesn't make her stupid or a "loony bird."
Do a couple tweets, screwups, or overreactions deserve this kind of outrage?
Sorry, no. All academic disciplines are not analogous and equivalent. The sociological re-casting of "racism" that we are referring to here is an opinion, and not even a majority one at that (among sociologists).
I agree. This is frightening. Any concept of a DDOS being a "digital sit-in" are dumb. PlayHaven may also have been trying to avoid the mob, too.
Second because hundreds and hundreds of men here and elsewhere seem quite happy to align themselves with an overtly sexist, violently threatening campaign against an individual whose views they disagree with.
What do you mean by "align themselves"? Those are extremely vague words.
Do you mean "approve of"? Or do you mean "takes the same side as"?
Anyone who approves of the DDOS is a moron. Anyone who approves of death threats is a sociopath. The people who issued threats should be subject to criminal prosecution.
However, people can find themselves legitimately on the same side of an issue as a bunch of assholes. No one should be forced out of a position by the fact that disgusting people also have that opinion.[1]
People like Richard Stallman who disagree (Richard Stallman is stuck in the past) really haven't got a clue that's going on.
A DDoS is akin to blocking the entry of customers to a retail establishment.
Erm, I don't know that I see that. I presume you mean the anonymous-handle twitter/facebook vitriol? Yeah, that's just what internet forum kids do. Every time a trainwreck happens. And disagreeing with Adria doesn't automatically place one in the same camp as them, or "align" one with them.
I, for one, think Adria absolutely deserved to be fired. I think I'm qualified to say that, because logic. I think we are all qualified to judge that one. I also think that the death/rape/violence threats she received were utterly reprehensible. One can be in both camps.
A certain "if you're not with us you're against us" rhetoric has been bandied about here recently, effectively implying that any who voice opposition, or fail to actively defend, Adria are somehow complicit to the vitriolic hate speech seen on Twitter / FB or wherever. This is not really a logical leap to make, and only serves to further divide the community.
It should be perfectly acceptable to voice rational viewpoints without fear of being associated with extremist groups. Logical discussion is a hallmark of this forum, and I would hate to see it disappear to fear and paranoia.
What a vindictive sociopath!
If the facts of the case were different and we had the same response, I would probably side with you. However, it seems like this person is throwing a little temper tantrum and it is, apparently, a pattern of behavior of her's that doesn't help anyone. It's also very poor judgement for someone representing a company at a conference.
It seems a little silly to me for someone that is allegedly an evangelist for a tech company not to know how the Internet works.
As for the racism bit, since you brought it up, no it was a moronic statement without real basis.
I don't think Sendgrid cowed at all. I think this person has a history, apparently, of baiting situations and causing herself to be a spectacle, very inappropriate for a representative.
FWIW, the prospect of being overheard for a passing comment and subsequently slandered all over Twitter is rather terrifying. I suspect many contributors here can easily see themselves in the shoes of the dev who was canned, and therefore perceive Adria's actions as unreasonable.
>Taking a photograph of someone in a public place and reporting what they said within earshot, without any expectation of privacy, does not warrant vitriol.
It's not actually a public place. It's a private venue. The venue can set the policy as it sees fit the same way concerts can ban recording devices, etc.
First, because it demonstrates the extent to which a company can be brought to its knees by a group of hostile people organized online.
Second because hundreds and hundreds of men here and elsewhere seem quite happy to align themselves with an overtly sexist, violently threatening campaign against an individual whose views they disagree with.
I am not in a position to comment on the firing, or what qualifies someone to excel as an "evangelist." The statement is right that she probably couldn't do her job well anymore.
But this is a sad thing, not a victory, and the further abuse and ignorance happening and being up voted here is really unsettling. Why are so many really so angry? I promise it has nothing to do with this woman.
Taking a photograph of someone in a public place and reporting what they said within earshot, without any expectation of privacy, does not warrant vitriol.
Joking about big dicks and sex disruptively in the context of a public event held for a profession which continues to struggle with sexism and misogyny means something very different than joking to a friend, and those people who have chosen to listen to what you have to say, about pretending to have a big dick.
And guess what, her sentiment about racism, whether I agree with it or not, is shared by many scholars of American race relations who are decidedly more informed on the subject.
Instead of shaming a stranger who has a different frame of reference than you (assuming you haven't had much experience as a black woman) why don't we all take a deep breath and think about how we can protect against the kind of fear so palpable in Sendgrid's statement, the kind that cowed them so extremely?