Hacker News Reader

Comment by bitL | Hacker News Reader

So they wanted him gone, figured out his sensitivities and he fell into the trap. Sad but common if some higher up decides to remove you "voluntarily".

View on HN

It's possible for an environment to be objectively toxic without regard to someone's "sensitivities".

I don’t generally pay much attention to this space. However, I’ve heard two interviews with Chris, both on Lex Fridman‘s podcast, and I don’t get a sense that he is an emotionally fragile person. The space he’s been operating in for ~20 years is filled with strong and often ideological opinions.

Just sounds to me like he felt like he was wasting his time.

Then why didn't he just say that he wanted to "pursue other challenges" or something like that, especially if he'd actually mean it?

You know what's even more common and isn't a conspiracy theory ?

Engineers letting technical disagreements turn personal.

And Chris himself said he disagreed with the technical direction of the project.

I'd be a bit skeptical of that. Sounds more like a team under stress and lashing out when someone questions the direction they are going.

In any event though not good.

They act like real a### on the forum so can only imagine how things are in private. Chris always came off really humble and down to earth.

link?

I haven't being there for a decent amount of time from my recollection John McCall was always acting really harshly. Was very stark contrast to say how Jose Valim acts on Elixir forum.

My guess would be Ben Cohen, though

I am very far removed from swift community so have 0 insight just shared my recollection of interactions on swift forums

Both. Chris mentioned not just one.

The post under discussion contains a link about "more heat than light".

In many parts of the world that goes against labor laws. You cannot harass or ostracize someone to make them leave. That is not just a toxic environment but way worse as there is intent to make the employee leave.

I don't think there was an employment involved here.

Still incredible toxic. Maybe not uncommon but still toxic.

> they wanted him gone, figured out his sensitivities and he fell into the trap

It's also possible that there are people who feel that yelling is an acceptable part of debate.

Misguided people, sure, but they do exist.

Then they should be taught, quick. Once is grounds for an apology, twice is bye-bye land. Who cares about 'objective' toxicity, WTF is wrong with people defending yelling at people.

> people defending yelling at people.

The probability is unusually high that they personally yell at people in collaborative meetings.

Trying not to make assumptions about people here, but yes, probably.

Many have been taught by abusive parents or figures of authority, or whatever shit television, that it's normal. "Some 'light' yelling is to be expected.", "Different styles of management/debate", "whatever works for them, I'm sure everyone does it a bit". What next? Corporal punishment? Like in the old days, when kids really respected their elders - or else - and were taught /right/ and women stayed in their place?

Those people need to be taught that no one, ever, should have yelled or should ever yell at them for being wrong or just disagreeing. It's not OK, it never was, it never is. Parents, friends, teachers, colleagues.

You spend 8 hours a day at work, if it's not a safe place, and you can find another job, GTF away as fast as possible, or have the perpetrators get the hell away, if you have this power.

I'm sorry we even have to say that.

If you're defending people yelling at people, you probably won't be pointing out that they are misguided if they think yelling is acceptable.

However, the claim being made was that this yelling was a trap that was intentionally set to drive Chris out and not just a case of someone who thinks yelling is acceptable behavior.

I was trying to answer to that (frankly paranoid rant about traps being set) by simplifying: Repeatedly yelling = fired. He or no one should driven away by violent behaviour. Fire the misbehaving person or say (like an adult): hey Chris, we (your management) are in disagreement with whatever, and are going with someone else as leadership, so we're reassigning you. If you want to go, well here's the door.

Anything else is just accepting sociopathic mind games. 'oh he shouldn't have felt threatened by violence and unchecked unacceptable behaviour! he was so naive, toxicity is not objective, suck it up'. WTF. I'm all for hearing the other side of this story but please, everyone (not you, GeekyBear!) stop defending sociopaths (or violent people) being sociopaths, and blaming victims not being sociopaths themselves.

The late Pieter Hintjens' writings on psychopathic behaviour needs a re-reading...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com