Why? Why can't hyperion2010, or anyone else, have an abrasive culture if they want to?

There is nowadays some controversy about, best as I can tell, gamers who like abrasive gaming, ie. shoot and insult each other. I can see how one might not want to participate, but why the need to force them to stop? Wouldn't leaving them to it be a reasonable solution?

If some nerds prefer a different code of conduct than you, can you really oppose that? Do you really think you can or should go into their group and tell them how they should behave?

What happened to live and let live?

What they aren't free to do without push-back is to tell others who want to do gardening that they should tolerate their abuse. I agree with Angorak that there is nothing in what we do that would require people being assholes which is why I, too, find it unacceptable.

If someone doesn't like the mood and tone of a given culture, they can start their own club or practice the activity without taking part in the social culture. They don't have to right to demand that everyone else change because their sensibilities are offended. If the members of a culture want to change to be more inclusive, then that's their decision. It has to be internal, not forced on them by pushy new members.

Maybe the analogy would be a goth at an alternative conference, where you have emos, punk, neon-hair cyberpunk people, SM enthousiasts, etcetera. What's acceptable for one subculture (say, smoking in public, to use the South Park stereotype) may not be appropriate for the other.

And here I think is the crux of the problem; it's what the article was about. Tech became mainstream, and attracted people who look at it as a job. From the point of view of us native nerds, we became colonized and are being pushed back from the thing we built as our little place in the universe where we would feel safe from the society calling us "weirdos". It's not just a clash of cultures, it feels like an invasion - contemporary tech industry is not the place it used to be. As a native tech nerd I honestly feel threatened by it.

The impression I got when I got started in technology two decades ago was that being weird was accepted because we all liked technology. Not that you had to be weird to like technology. Heck, today you don't even have to like technology. Just know the right cultural-references and you're in.

But now you are excluding others from joining your world. Are you not as bad as the people who made you feel displaced?

Why not take the stance that you can be better?

I knew people like that too, though I can't tell how often it was because they were just jerks with technical interests, and how much it was a defense mechanism, trying to maintain a little bit of self-esteem while being constantly bullied.

> I dont fit the real nerd stereotype. I played football and I don't like dnd. I resent the notion that I am some kind of brogrammer picking on the poor helpless nerds. Who is really picking on who here?

I don't think that was the message coming from the article. Most of the hardcore nerd circles I know would happily accept you and wouldn't mind you like football and are not into DnD. But usually this doesn't work the other way - your DnD-playing football-agnostic nerd gets picked on and called a "nolife".

> If it truly is about the code, as the author states, then why should this bs about authentic nerd culture even matter?

Because the author states that the nerd culture is (among other things) about "the code over status games".

Yeah well 9 times out of 10 the "jocks" who bullied the "nerds" were doing it out of a deep seated insecurity too. Just because someone self identifies with a subculture does not mean they are any less capable of being an asshole.

What I am not fine with is the cultural invasion, the people suddenly appearing, realizing there is more of them than us "weirdos" and telling us "this is our field now, you are outnumbered, you must conform to our standars". "OK, join our field; the good land is rich, and can provide for everyone. But why won't you let us live in peace, why you need to keep bullying us?".

This US vs THEM mentality is something that was not created by "weird nerds" - all those nerds wanted was to be accepted. But we had to escape, because mainstream society doesn't accept our way of thinking (curiosity, intellectual interests, intellectual honesty) and bullied us. It's them who started it, and it's them who are invading our safe harbour again.

And it probably would still be fine if social justice crowd just stayed away.

Anyway; the article explained it very well, actually.

I'm also female. I don't like being pushed out of my own d*&mned nerdy home by people who think I'm invading because I happen to stand up for myself.

I have no sympathy if you feel uncomfortable or threatened by people who expect you to treat others with respect, especially when you use terms like "invading" and prop yourself up as a paragon of intellectual pursuits.

That's not the people I'm talking about. Social justice crowd is the exact oposite of treating others with respect. And by their actions they are exacerbating the very problems they claim to fight against.

> when you use terms like "invading"

That's what it feels like.

> prop yourself up as a paragon

Well, I played Paragon Shepard, for what it's worth.

Only dogs bark at strangers. The rest of us say "welcome."

We asked for this, whether we like it or not :)

Yes, unfortunately we did. We dreamed for an amazing world, but it's not what we got when the world joined in.

We democratised technology. We built a global IP network-of-networks and used it to connect a UNIX-like kernel in everyone's pocket, in a way that serves and delights them.

I distinctly remember a large family gathering in summer 2010 where I expected the usual pattern of sitting in a corner of the garden with the handful of other techie cousins, discussing whatever was new in our world. Instead, I had people coming and asking me if I was holding an iPad, and if they could play with it. That was a profound moment for me, it told me that we'd really achieved something special - a form of cutting edge technology that wasn't something non-techies ignored until they were forced to use it for work or banking or some other mundane task. Instead, they were drawn to it with the same fascination and wonder that I have always been. For that moment, everyone present, was a geek. I loved it.

Have some of the complex technical things that I once held as "mine" become dulled by the need to serve the masses? Of course. If that annoys me from a philosophical or technical perspective, my best choice is to forge ahead again and find a niche equivalent, or build something for myself.

In many cases, I welcome it, because something that I once had to invest time and effort into, is now smoothed over and shifts into the background, making time for me to focus on something else.

Yes, this is the amazing world we wanted. :).

> Have some of the complex technical things that I once held as "mine" become dulled by the need to serve the masses? Of course. If that annoys me from a philosophical or technical perspective, my best choice is to forge ahead again and find a niche equivalent, or build something for myself.

> In many cases, I welcome it, because something that I once had to invest time and effort into, is now smoothed over and shifts into the background, making time for me to focus on something else.

Here you captured what I never could in words, so again - thank you. It's exactly what I feel - as cool tech I held as "mine" became mainstream, it also became dulled. I know it's an irrational feeling, but I do have it. But as you say, the best thing to do is to move on, find a new frontier, a new niche, and live there, until it again becomes common, and you can go even further. That is the beauty of progress!

Thinking more about it, I realize you're right. We have that amazing world. But with it, unfortunately, we once again exposed ourselves to the people who reject us and want to bully us. I'm not sure what to do about it. Should I escape even further, into another niche, one that hasn't been tainted by the culture of dishonesty and signalling games yet? It's getting harder and harder, because now everything is on the Internet, and the bullies move at the speed of light.

grow the fuck up.

> grow the fuck up.

I always say I'm 5 years old, and I like it that way.

I can't stand nativism anywhere I smell it.

The article was about hackers, the set of outcasts that self-identify based on rough consensus and running code and merit. The article wasn't about hackers, the buzzword that is good to have on your meetup and LinkedIn profile.

Such is the extent of the appropriation of hacker culture--there is this weird notion that workplace professionalism (whatever that is) somehow now has to be embraced by people claiming to be hackers. It's bullshit.

In detail: Hackers can't complain that their movement has grown and developed facets they don't like. Hackers are mischievous, hackers are smart, hackers are always ahead of the pack discovering and inventing cool new things. Therefore, hackers, by their very self-definition, can't be called hackers anymore, they must have moved on elsewhere and developed new labels for themselves. If they haven't, and have become complacent and jaded with newcomers, they have ceased to be true hackers.

(I use "they", because one should never self-apply the term hacker :)

To you, it's a job. To me, it's one of my many hobbies that I enjoy doing. It just turns out that there's more demand in the business world for software engineering than there is for admiring artwork of anthropomorphic creatures or swinging swords around.

My other pet project for a long time was moderating a metal board - what do you think happened when people came up with Nu Metal? It was an outrage.

If you want to have a private, invite-only community that has strict rules of abrasive (or other) behaviour, that is also possible.

If, however, you run around the world telling everyone how amazing your culture is, how it's producing things that will change all our lives, how it's great for getting a well paying career, etc, etc, all of which the hacking culture has done, then you have nobody to blame when people start paying attention. We asked for all of this, and we reap the rewards, good and bad.

The real problem is that there is no coherent definition of abuse and people who are better at playing the social game use that skill to define everything as abuse which they do not like / undermines their status. And that is what the article calls out in the context of 'nerds', 'nerd culture' and 'newcomers' (or at least that is my interpretation of it)

There are many abusers that are quite good at the "social game" you describe, by exploiting insecurities about rules, especially in their absence. Saying they are "bad at the game" is actually one of the standard plays (and terribly harmful to those that are _actually_ "bad at the game").

The solution is not "there are no rules", but "we have rules here and others here". We need more spaces with with different sets of rules, where everyone can nerd out in their fashion, not chaos.

The problem about society is that you can't cut out social interaction from humans. Any attempt to do so is doomed in my opinion.

The moment you're thinking in dichotomous terms like "the organizers" and "the attendees", you're not talking about culture. The moment you cut out the play, you're not talking about culture. Every culture has varying degrees of play (that go well beyond the amount of play allowed by any CoC I've seen), and that play is acceptable but only known to members of whatever in-group is in question. Introducing rules that eliminate the play inherent in cultures is okay when you do so for the purpose of letting members of disparate cultures to interact safely with each other. The big concern hackers have and that the author of the article we're discussing is getting at, is that the values from which CoCs are fashioned are fine within the confines of the events where they are enforced, but when those values are foisted upon every hacker and nerd sub-culture (including the abrasive ones) and attempts to squelch the diversity of cultures, then it no longer represents intersectionality inclusive of weirdos.

    The problem about society is that you can't cut out social
    interaction from humans. Any attempt to do so is doomed in
    my opinion.

    What you want is an abrasive culture and I oppose that.

highly relevant: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=137392506516022&w=2

Hold it right there. I run the space, I raise the money, I sign the contracts, I'm can be held responsible if someone misbehaves (morally and legally) and I'm the person that doesn't watch the talks, but uses them as a time where they can actually make sure that the next person has their time and the tables are clean?

And "organizer" and "attendee" is a dichotomy? Both are roles and forcibly assuming that everyone plays the same role is harmful.

The point is: In the end none of these group has a right to redefine the CoCs. They've joined a space which has been built by the "weirdo nerds" for their purposes and has the CoCs those deemed fair. Joining this space was no problem, the "weirdo nerds" welcomed them (or didn't bother to say: GO AWAY, both interpretations are acceptable), but now they try to dominate this space by abusing their skills in the "game of social skills" and rewrite the spaces CoC to one they like more and that's neither fair nor right.

If you can't get enough people to stand up and say "we're running a conference for tough as nails abrasive people, make sure you come in armored clothing", that might be a description of a problem.

If a few people founded a company like this and became successful, some people who joined later would complain about the abrasiveness.

And if the complainants happened to be from certain "protected classes", abrasiveness would be legally prohibited.

If people like hyperion2010 or others want an abrasive culture, why can't they take what they dish? Why is it so ok for someone to call me a c*&t but I can't say the words "male privilege"?

Basic in-group/out-group dynamics.

Are you surprised that the system (and the people within it) reacts to broad-based accusations about its structure, rather differently from how it reacts to angry beefs between individuals?

Let them take up knitting.

The only thing it creates, ultimately, is the endgame of the Geek Social Fallacies: a place where the only people left all have nasty personalities and no social connections to any other kinds of people.

http://www.plausiblydeniable.com/opinion/gsf.html

If you haven't been in an environment where everybody is tolerated -- you're really missing out. I've been lucky enough to work on projects where programming nerds mingle with visual artists, mechanics, hardware hackers, fashionistas, musicians, and more, and it's amazing. And furthermore, it's not like we're watching what we say all day. In my experience, if you have a baseline where everyone knows they are accepted and have recourse to call someone out, then there's lots of "inappropriate" humor.

I also don't think there is any implication that I want an abrasive culture. I do not think that early google style corporate culture is a good thing. I think we need to dissociate nerds behaving badly from simply not picking up on social signals or not caring about them. The reason I say this is because when you treat someone as a villain who is simply thinking out loud you basically stop any potential for real dialogue in its tracks.

The two groups are not identical, but the probability of being uninterested in playing the hierarchy game increases significantly when conditioned on being a nerd (and even more so, being in the infosec scene, where the author and I spend most of our time) to the point that they dominate the social scene.

Sidenote: The word "hacker" doesn't seem to mean anything anymore, it has been used in so many different ways that it has become too ambiguous. I personally like the phrase "weird nerd" better, because it might be a little more specific, and it is how I feel. (Probably doesn't help that I don't have the skills that seem to go along with "weird nerds"/"hackers".)

On the peak, we ran a 5-day conference set with a one week program around it only on voluntary work.

We currently have an attendance that is very diverse (we don't count) and we worked for that a lot.

It couldn't be any less professional and if it can, we'd like to remove that.

http://2014.eurucamp.org/concept/

The Elasticsearch usergroup is run at a small community-driven coworking space (and existed before Elastic, the company) and the Rust usergroup definitely has no professional outset.

I also ran devrooms on FOSDEM.

One of the meetups the Ruby Berlin e.V. runs (the governing body for all of this) has _3 full talks_+Lightning talks every month, without any company involvement other then providing rooms.

Suits are really of no interest to me in this case.

Also, I'd like to say that I'm not discussing from a theoretical point here - I've been doing community work for more then 10 years and have put all the things I say here into production at some point and in multiple contexts. With measurable successes and failures.

I just say all this sounds more like "conference" (= prof) than "hacker space" (= hobby)

Both can be fun.

I'm from Stuttgart and going to the Shack is a whole different experience than going to any meetup or conference.

I do help and attend spontanous meetups of all forms and fashions as well - still, they all have rules and they are all better for it.

I agree.

I prefer to use the term "nerd" to mean that type of abrasive person and "geek" as someone who is enjoys the same interests but is not interested in point-scoring and other aspects of that abrasive culture.