Adria Richards

I hear she is a fucking slut filthy jewess who loves nigger cocks.

>>80
This was a programmer's convention.
And programmers are generally socially-awkward medium-to-high-functioning autistic retards.

It's assumed that the appropriate behaviour is political correctness.
Obviously that assumption was not shared by those two individuals nor the rest of the Internet. Among many people (esp. techies) crude humour is essential to socializing. And since a programmer's convention is about socializing, it sounds silly to ban such an important part of neckbeards' (of both sexes) socialization rites.

Even if it was in the workplace, any joke regarding sexuality or gender are just plain rude.
...to you! And frankly, I wouldn't hire you because I would be facing the dilemma of either pissing off all the other techies by banning them from uttering jokes that might offend your mimosa-like sensibilities, or to wait and do nothing until an HR or even PR incident happens because you felt a certain discomfort regarding the dick joke Alice told a sniggering Bob in private, and you were even more offended by my usage of the word sniggering.

Obligatory: http://harmful.cat-v.org/pc.jpg

>>80
Get AIDS, niggerfaggotkike.

>>81
I work as an industrial painter with tradesmen. We're rude to each other all day long, everyday of the week as well as to women who walk by. This is our culture and how we behave. Culture does not absolve the fact that we are rude.

I really I don't why the reason why people are upset at Adria for complaining. I understand why she complained and I don't care that she did. I understand why people make tasteless jokes. Is the problem the fact that someone got fired for doing it?

>>83
They made a “tasteless joke” in private. It was not aimed at her and it was not offensive to women specifically.

>>83
Back to /industrialpainting/ ``please''.

>>84
This whole situation makes me deeply uncomfortable.

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?

>>86
That makes sense. Thanks.

>>87
You're welcome, I just pasted a random comment from HN, I haven't bother to read it myself.

>>86
scholars of American race relations

LOL

>>86
Why are so many really so angry?
It's like as if you've never read a single post on /prog/ ever, fucking SHALOM HYMIE!

>>86
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.
As you said, it was Adria's choice to eavesdrop. What's next, a black female homosexual ISP sysadmin who runs a network sniffer "for testing purposes", "happens" to fall on someone's email containing a racist/sexist/dick joke, gets offended, and posts to twitter the subscriber info?

Also, like I said so many times before, dick jokes do naturally belong in a programming event since most programmers (of either sex) are immature autistic fucks (myself included), and if you can't deal with that then don't go there. It's a socialization event, and socialization for most programmers involves immature and crude humour. If such humour is a trigger for your episodes of anti-white-male rage, then don't fucking go there. And please go see a therapist. You are free to organize a "politically-correct" version of the event, I'm sure lots of competent people will attend._^sarcasm

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.
Defining racism in such an ass-backward manner is fucking retarded (if your purpose is constructive, that is), and provably so. I don't care how many scholars tell me that the Earth is flat, that won't make it true, neither will it make it true that non-white people can't be racist, or that women can't be sexist, or that ${less-privileged-group} can't discriminate against ${more-privileged-group}. Everyone has the power to act like a piece of shit, and a few black guys can certainly racially bully the fuck out of a weak white nerd.

>>90
The thing about /prog/ is that there's too much figurative language, lies and irrelevant noise. What I need is an explanation that explains what and why in a neutral POV.

>>92
You are fucking retarded.
Because you were born that way.

Lel I can't imagine the feeling of googling your name and getting 76,000 hits, 90% of which are people who despise you.

>>94
Success. At last I have found success!

Sure is Reddit in here today.

>>96
22 00:00
Excellent triple timestamp dubs!

>>92
Ohhhh, so you're retarded. Well ok then, back to http://msn.com with you.

>>98
Check my retardation

>>99
Double retards!

>>98-99
CHECK YOUR ABLE-MINDED PRIVILEGE!

9 posts till trips, guys, who's gonna GET?

check 'em trips

>>94
Reading the comments on her blog, I really doubt she cares.

She's absolutely insufferable about the whole thing.
Refuses to believe she dealt with the issue poorly, or that she did something wrong (posting someone's picture on twitter from a private event with no permission, as well as defaming/slandering them with it).

How she acted makes her look to be a very toxic asset for any business considering hiring her- so little in the way of actual benefit ( she's just a PR ``techy'' ``social networker''); but a lot in the way of baggage and attitude that practically no company would want to encourage.

For instance, you'd never want a worker who snarls like this behind someone's back, you'd prefer if they confronted them about it.
Failing that, talk to others in charge (event organisers) or you a long time before calling in external groups -whether they be unions, friends or legions of tumblr and twitter warriors.
It shows a distrust of people and an expectation of them to be unreasonable, rather than encouraging some good openness and dialogue.
And you'd be furious (and fire them) if they ever thought of attaching the company name to their own social or moral crusades without permission.
If they then painted themselves as a matyr (Joan of Arc) for their cause and offer no apology, you'd fire them faster.

She did what she did with complete disregard for her company's image ( and she's the fucking PR person, for shit's sake!).
Should've known better, heck even if she wanted to continue on her maddening cultural marxist bent she could've handled it better.
All in all, a bloody idiot.

>>104
Thanks for that, you actually make sense.

>>104
Actually, now that you mention slander, you can go to court for that. But I don't care, the abused can request retribution if they want.

>>104
Should've known better, heck even if she wanted to continue on her maddening cultural marxist bent she could've handled it better.
Could someone explain to me what "cultural marxism" has to with catering to the sensibilities of the over-sensitive, free speech, and dick jokes? I really don't see the connection.

Adrian RichardStallman

she is a faggot

>>111
sweet trips bro

>>110
Lick my sweaty poop hole

Some people really need to understand that "not being offended" is not a fucking right.

>>107
It's all about who was targeted.  I'm sure those groups of Indians wandering around were talking about how hard they got after hearing about a rape so powerfully bonding amongst their countrymen.  There most likely was some creampie fetishism thrown in, they like it dirty.  Sandeep was most aroused, and used his familiarity of the Kama Sutra to prolong his ejaculation to near timelessness.  The look on his face was most exquisite 

The H1-Bs were careful to stalk their prey at PyCon like proud tigers.  Evangelists were specifically avoided for the toxic smell they emitted precoitus.  It seemed as though women flocked to them, as if the curry odor their bodies produced produced an intense hunger for a *meating* with these Enterprise coders.

>>113
Terry?

>>112
As a black hacker, I feel offended by your post.

>>112
Neither is harassing women. Freedom of expression is not freedom from consequences.

>>115
As a person of science, I don't give a fuck about your feelings.

>>115
Don't we have a separate but unequal programming board for colored folk?

https://news.ycombinator.com/
http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights
https://boards.4chan.org/pol/

>>116
women
Oh, do you think there's something particular about harassing women? How about harassing white men? Or people outside the gender binary? OH B-B-BUT MUH PRIVILEGES Fuck you dipshit.

Neither is harassing people
Please check off each the following boxes depending on whether you find that they represent harassment:
[ ] Private conversation at low volume in public setting, person A tells discriminatory joke they just reminisced to person B, unaware of the presence of person C and of the fact that they are eavesdropping. Person C feels targeted by the joke and is offended.
[ ] Same thing as before, except the joke is merely inappropriate and not actually discriminatory.
[ ] Private conversation at low volume in public setting, person A tells discriminatory joke they just reminisced to person B, unaware of the presence of person C and of the fact that they are eavesdropping. Person C does not feel targeted by the joke, but is offended anyway.
[ ] Same thing as before, except the joke is merely inappropriate and not actually discriminatory.
[ ] Public message board over the Internet, person A posts discriminatory joke they just reminisced. Person C stumbles on the page, feels targeted by the joke and is offended.
[ ] Same thing as before, except the joke is merely inappropriate and not actually discriminatory.
[ ] Public message board over the Internet, person A posts discriminatory joke they just reminisced. Person C stumbles on the page, does not feel targeted by the joke, but is offended anyway.
[ ] Same thing as before, except the joke is merely inappropriate and not actually discriminatory.
[ ] Public message board over the Internet, person A posts discriminatory joke they just reminisced, spoilered and with a trigger warning. Person C stumbles on the page, feels targeted by the joke and is offended.
[ ] Same thing as before, except the joke is merely inappropriate and not actually discriminatory.
[ ] Public message board over the Internet, person A posts discriminatory joke they just reminisced, spoilered and with a trigger warning. Person C stumbles on the page, does not feel targeted by the joke, but is offended anyway.
[ ] Same thing as before, except the joke is merely inappropriate and not actually discriminatory.