I'm surprised that the oppressive language ("gay shit" and "fucking nerds") didn't come to a head sooner.
I've kicked people out of hackathons for less. Why let this slide in awkward silence?
I've kicked people out of hackathons for less. Why let this slide in awkward silence?
I've personally grown to be fairly intolerant of screed like this, and language of this sort has been a factor (among other factors) behind me leaving at least one job now. But it's costly (in dollars) to vote with your feet like that. At the end of the day, we all need to pay the bills.
Then maybe that night send an email saying "We've all said stupid shit, but I can't have people telling a copy editor to put 'stupid gay shit' on a page. We're going to lose people that way. Just be a little more sensitive to your surroundings and you'll be fine."
But the "fucking nerds" thing? No, I don't think I'll kick someone out for that, but I will most certainly pull them aside and say, "Listen, dude. You've got some talent and some experience around this table. We're all people - our goals as humans are basically the same - to be healthy, socially active, highly collaborative friends with good careers and hobbies and whatever. Nobody is here to be your nerd. If you're part of the team, be that and show that. Most of all, if you have something to say about the structure of this team, do not - EVER - do it in 'half-joking' way. That shit is toxic and it's not welcome here."
So yes, in both cases, I think that an intervention was required and I'm surprised that one didn't occur.
Would you cite the text where you decided this? I'm not seeing it but likely read with a different tone.
> ...I bet that if he got his way and Billy paid him off...
Again, I'm not seeing this. Do you mean paying him 1/9th of the money and parting ways?
Didn't you read the "we devs are taking over the world" part and the infamous Andreessen's quote?
That's evil in my book.
Do you mean paying him 1/9th of the money and parting ways?
If Bobby was paid or compensated as he had expected, we wouldn't know about these incidents involving those slurs. That's my point.
> Actually, we are in charge now. You just haven’t realized it yet. Automate or be automated. If you don’t know how to map out complex systems. If you never got grounded as a kid for taking things apart. If you are too lazy or unwilling to learn our ways. If you don’t work for us yet, you soon will. Because software is eating the world.
These are things that software engineers tell themselves after they have been bullied in the business world to remind themselves that they are valuable and that they should be respected, despite encountering people sometimes that place no value or respect in either them or the work that they perform.
Perhaps you could try and share what about the text feels evil to you, though? Why does it feel threatening to you?
IMO, you think that everything that Billy did was clear and above board. That the engineers should have _understood_ that Billy was the one in charge by what he said and what he did. That he owned the idea and that they were there to implement his vision as they best interpreted it in order to get things off the ground. His "payment" for this would be: the win, the .4%, and the good times. The .4% especially made that explicit.
Also, it was clear that there was not necessarily any connection between Billy and the rest of the team after the event unless Billy thought they jelled and decided to keep things rolling. Otherwise they would part ways with everyone having had fun and the coders having gotten a reasonable "taste" if things did take off. Because of Billy mentioning the LLC and his partner.
What?! I mean 'oppressive language' as that phrase is used in various systems of communications modeling, such as NVC and Active Listening. Why are you saying that I mean something else?
> he's as shady as he claims Billy to be
This is, at best, a tu quoque fallacy. Why are you doing damage control?
At the end of the day, this isn't even about Bobby and Billy, but about all the Bobbies and Billies you meet in the tech scene generally.
But "oppressive language?" That just seems like a good descriptor of a communications style that we all encounter from time to time. That's the reason these "systems" have picked it up.