After reading all sides of the story, I see why there is so much anger towards Adria. However, it is unacceptable for her or SendGrid to be attacked digitally.
Adria did an arguably right thing in a wrong way at the wrong time.
1. Assuming the way she said it happened is correct, the guys behind her made a sexual (forking/fucking; Dongle/Penis) not sexist joke. If it were even to be seen as sexist, it was towards men.
2. I find it hard to see how taking their pictures and "shaming" them would have made anything thing better. It only set them up to be lynched verbally or otherwise.
3. It was a PRIVATE conversation in a public setting that was overheard. It happens to the best of us. There are 100s of bloopers on YouTube of broadcasters saying embarrassing things when the mic was supposed to be off.
4. She appears hypocritical because at the same PYCON she sexual jokes on Twitter (far much more public) while representing her company (having your company on your profile is almost same as wearing a badge at a conference. Not to include the use of the PYCON hashtag)
5. As a DEVELOPER evangelist for her company, she should be more patient with developers by a massive factor compared to people in other roles. It makes no sense evangelizing for/to people that would be uncomfortable dealing with you. Appeal to understanding, not fear.
6. It is good to know she can stand for herself. Unfortunately, I have to say she got the incident and methodology wrong.
All this will pass, and hopefully serve as a lesson for participants and us observers.
> Adrea[sic] did an arguably right thing in a wrong way
It seems she did 2 different things.
1) She reported an incident that made her feel uncomfortable. (I think she did the correct thing here, at least I agree with it)
2) She posted a face photo of some attendees from a sponsoring company, publicly (not just for PyCon attendees but for the whole world) along with an insult "ass clowns".
[note: 2 came before 1 as well]
2 is completely unacceptable and I am disappointed and disgusted at PyCon for not kicked her out. Image you go around with a phone snapping pictures of attendees, immediately send them to twitter with insulting tags below.
I think she should be the one to lose her job, and PyCon should issue a public apology (a little edit in Github won't do it, sorry). If she doesn't understand why what she did was wrong, she shouldn't be invited to PyCon in future years. How about this, if she comes, I won't.
PlayHeaven -- what can I say. I haven't heard of them before but they sure are on my black list as of yesterday. To terminate an employer after he has been slandered online is disrespectful. I refuse to do business with you and will go out my way to tell everyone what you did.
(There is another side issue here and I think it goes beyond hypocrisy I think it is straight malignancy. I think she pondered her odds and decided to roll the dice, given her position she quickly climbed the popularity ladder from 0 to 100 in a one day, I have no proof of this, only she knows, but her job title combined with her previous off color penis jokes on Twitter point me in that direction).
1) You don't get to tell someone what is offensive to them.
2) Totally agree, it was not a wise choice.
3) You don't get to tell someone what is offensive to them.
4) You don't get to tell someone what is offensive to them.
5) You don't get to tell someone what is offensive to them.
6) It's true, not all the best choices were made.
She used her credibility as a member of SendGrid [a sponsor of the conference] to reinforce her statement. These guys did not even endorce their behavior via a company. They were 2 individuals who were talking to each other, she ease dropped and made a mountain out of a molehill.
Instead of a learning opportunity, this has turned into an enormous fustercluck.
It would have been better for Adria Richards to address the matter directly rather than post a photo on twitter, but it was not wrong for her to address the matter.
Similarly, nearly everyone can agree - including Richards - that the employer who allegedly fired one of the people involved in the incident clearly overreacted.
There are learning opportunities in these incidents - opportunities to learn the best way to address a real issue when it comes up. The goal should be growing awareness and respect, apology and forgiveness, and reconciliation.
But the extreme outburst of misogyny - the insults, abuse, and physical threats including threats of rape - is perhaps the biggest learning opportunity of all: the opportunity for an entire community to recognize that it is still dysfunctional in terms of gender equality.
Edit - SendGrid just announced that they have fired Richards. Yet another instance in this cluster of reactive ugliness and missed opportunities.
> It would have been better for Adria Richards to address the matter directly rather than post a photo on twitter
This isn't a case of "it would have been better", it was a case of "what she did was clearly wrong". She overreacted as did the man's employer, and she has not shown any remorse.
> But the extreme outburst of misogyny - the insults, abuse, and physical threats including threats of rape - is perhaps the biggest learning opportunity of all: the opportunity for an entire community to recognize that it is still dysfunctional in terms of gender equality.
I haven't seen here on HN any of the insults, abuse, or threats you mentioned, nor have I made any myself. Do not blame all of us just because a vocal minority have gotten out of hand, and certainly do not use it as a tool to shame us into silence and shut down what is so far a reasoned discussion on the matter.
It wasn't wrong for her to address the matter, but she addressed the matter wrong regardless. Taking offense to a random conversation that you're not party to is one thing, but taking a picture of the people and calling up your significant number of followers and media presence in an attempt to ruin the offenders without so much as letting them have their side of the story surely is not in any way defensible.
True, the backlash that ensued got very heated, very quickly. But here's the point: both sides are wrong. And as more discussions happen with the parties that were involved, it's seeming like Adria may have even misheard part of what she was taking offense to.
So what's the fix? Understanding. Understanding that people will be people, and you can't fix people. If someone is making you feel uncomfortable, talk to them or an authority. What Adria did was just bound to cause more trouble, and she had to know that. I agree with you that there are opportunities to learn the best way to address a real issue when it comes up. The real issue is how a media figure plays off controversy to ruin the lives of people they don't agree with. We need to address that. This has absolutely nothing to do with gender equality.
There's some psychotic sociopaths on the internet. There always will be. That doesn't mean "the entire community is dysfunctional." On the contrary, I think the community as a whole has reacted quite rationally.
It got crossposted on various places that have little/nothing to do with programming, so hopefully most of the nasty stuff was just from random dickheads rather than the python community.
> But the extreme outburst of misogyny - the insults, abuse, and physical threats including threats of rape [...] entire community to recognize that it is still dysfunctional in terms of gender equality.
Instead of a learning opportunity, this has turned into an enormous fustercluck
I'm still holding some hope that after expending a lot of time and energy trying to distill an extremely gray situation into black and white, the communities involved will have something to learn from this.
Not to mention the spaz going on in the other thread about sendgrid's outage...
It doesn't matter if its a DDOS attack or some other outage. A quick scan of the comments leads me to believe quite a few people are actually happy with sendgrid's outage.
Having experienced PyCon for the first time this year, I am extremely saddened by how these events have unfolded. Ironically, I think this particular issue is eclipsing how female and kid friendly this conference is.
I have attended and spoken and several conferences (probably reaching the upper 80s) and this year's PyCon was more female-supportive than any other conference I have ever attended (Google IO, OSCON, WWDC, Where, BarCamps, etc etc).
Honestly, I was (happily) surprised about how many women attended and spoke. 20%! Of course, this number may seem low if you just blur it out, but in our industry, if you have ever attended any other tech conference, you will realize why 20% is such a high number.
The amount of attention and support PyLadies got from the PyCon/Python community was nothing short of outstanding. I sat during the PyCon PyLadies Fundraiser auction. I saw how crappy card games and posters signed by Guido and PyCon organizers sold for $300. I saw how the community managed to get "A 30-min Walk from Jack Dorsey" as one of the things to be auctioned. You don't just get that an item like that by sitting idle. Somebody from the PyCon community had to pull some strings and go through some efforts to get that for PyLadies. Heck, some guy, 1hr before the auction just gave his personal Chromebook for auction because he wanted to help the PyLadies cause. PyLadies raised 10K in less than 2hrs. All community-driven. I have never seen - in any conference - a community putting so much effort to push the goal of increasing women in tech. Never.
And yet all this drama is painting such a different picture of what I would consider the best conference I have ever attended. The biggest effort I have seen for women in tech, out-shadowed by a silly penis joke and all the drama that ensued after that.
To the PyCon organizers and PyLadies community as a whole: Don't let this get to you. You did an amazing job. To me, it was such an inspiring conference, that it will always be in my schedule. The large amount of kids coding in python and playing with their Raspberry Pis, the ad-hoc tech donations that were being done teachers, the support to PyLadies, all that stuff that really matters, did not go unnoticed. It is just that we are not as loud as the rest. But we care. Thank you!!!
> Ironically, I think this particular issue is eclipsing how female and kid friendly this conference is.
This is the biggest thing that bugs me. PyCon this year was awesome, and instead of talking about record attendance and all the other positive things we're talking about a stupid dick joke.
I applaud the PyCon organizers for clearly delineating what is acceptable behavior and what is not. I especially applaud them for including public shaming in the "unacceptable" category.
The rest of their code is there to protect conference goers. The sections discussing harassment are there for a reason - harassment is a real problem at these events.
Similarly, conference goers should be protected from the threat of being publicized as a less-than-human creature on the Internet. There's been some discussion of the reaction to Adria and Jesse. There could just as likely have been a strong, dangerous reaction to the men who made the comments. Saying "these guys are a threat to women" on the Internet could actually put them in danger, and no one should expect to be put in that situation by attending PyCon.
> There could just as likely have been a strong, dangerous reaction to the men who made the comments.
'dangerous'? Really? Are people who fight against sexism really 'just as likely', is in, have displayed a pattern of the same behaviour in the past? Or is this a false equivalency?
Same thing. Take a person, smash them publicly, and hope that the everyone watching will get the idea and stop doing that thing, because of fear of similar punishment.
...but, I was under the impression there was a pretty well defined protocol for handling public sorts of hate-speech like antisemitism, and trolling, and that had been shown in all kinds of circumstances not to work.
You get all the same reactions we've seen here; a social reaction against the 'shaming' group to socially prevent similar shaming from happening in the future.
Which totally mitigates the potential benefit of the original action.
The correct responses have always been:
1) Don't engage with obvious trolls. These are a lost cause. You're wasting everyone's time.
2) Speak positively about the topic instead of negatively about the other person
3) Engage with the people who are doing the wrong thing and try to correct their behavior so they become mini-champions of 'the right way' in their own community, thus spreading correct behavioral policy organically.
I thought that this was well known stuff; we certainly covered it in college. I'm boggled by this whole bizaar extravaganza. It's such a cliche.
3) is horrible. It only works if you assume that you are so much smarter and have more knowledge than the people who are involved in the issue, and that you can therefore come up with an argument that they haven't heard before that is still so utterly convincing that they turn 100% around.
> I think it's interesting that public shaming isn't the answer to problems, but that a lot of people don't seem to appreciate that.
The main point for public airing of this information is to inform others of the attitudes and behaviors that exist and to provide evidence of an actual problem.
> 3) Engage with the people who are doing the wrong thing and try to correct their behavior so they become mini-champions of 'the right way' in their own community, thus spreading correct behavioral policy organically.
This only works if you are a member of the peer group of the people doing the wrong thing. In the case of adria richards, she is a woman of color addressing behavior that tends to come from men, so I don't think it is fair to say that this would be a realistic thing to do.
I think the key here is to treat everyone like people. By publicly shaming two individuals and associating them with sexism they are being turned into figureheads for sexism. Real people make mistakes, say stupid things, are affected by their environments and upbringing, have prejudices and biases that they acquired from a life-time of interacting with other people. Everyone is like this, many people do not even realize what some of their biases or prejudices are. Turning them into into figureheads strips away the complexity and says "these guys are what is wrong". Which is complete and utter bullshit. They were just two guys having a private conversation.
If someone says something in private that you disagree with then you should bring it up with them in private or get and intermediary, like the conference organizers to. They may have been very sensitive to gender issues and sympathetic to her agenda but she will never know because she never put the effort into discussing it with them.
The problem is not PyCon. This is not an issue that should be solved by changing a code of conduct.
This is a problem with a person and her over zealous and ridiculous actions.
Let's be clear here, there should be nothing wrong with making dick jokes to your friend. Did he say "Haha, look at these dongles. They look like dicks. But we don't need them because have dicks! Maybe they should give these to the women so they can be better programmers with big dicks like us."? No.
We are living in a world where people increasingly feel the need to be "personally offended" by things that don't even involve them.
What if the male in question made an Englishman, Irishman, and Scotishman joke? Hell, they're pretty fucking funny! And you know what? They involve the Englishman doing something desperately stupid. Being an Englishman, am I offended? Fuck no.
I'm a little confused, what about privacy laws? Yes, you are at a conference, but that doesn't give anybody the right to take your picture and post it on twitter, without asking your permission, right? (Sorry, German here, so if the laws in the US are completly different, please ignore).
> "Yes, you are at a conference, but that doesn't give anybody the right to take your picture and post it on twitter, without asking your permission, right?"
Even in Germany this is legal. The right to photograph someone is usually delineated by the principle of "reasonable expectation of privacy". Note that this is a legal term that has been defined both through legislation and via decades of case law in many countries - so personal definitions of it don't apply here.
Common places where courts have upheld the reasonable expectation of privacy include restrooms (including public ones), a home, a hotel room, etc. A conference talk is not one of these places. Which is to say, people are free to photograph at will.
Note that should the property be private, the owners (or agents thereof) are entitled to disallow photography. Note also, importantly, that the right to disallow photography does not include the right to confiscate any photographs already taken. The most the property owner can do is remove the individual from their premises or have them arrested for trespassing.
Note also that while photographing someone in a public place is not a violation of any criminal law in most Western countries, it does not shield you from civil liabilities - you can still be pursued for damages, libel, or defamation (which seem like it may be relevant in this situation).
There are some countries and territories with substantially stricter laws regarding the likeness of people. Japan and Quebec for example are places where the right to photograph someone in public is not protected by default.
With very constrained exceptions, in most jurisdictions of the United States, it's entirely legal to take a photograph of an individual in a public place and post it to the Internet without their permission.
IANAL, but I believe it does. In the US, what matters is whether you have the expectation of privacy, and sitting in a conference room you obviously don't.
(There's other stuff that comes into play when you try to profit off such photographs, so the situation can get more complicated than that.)
The operative phrase here is "reasonable expectation of privacy," as in, you're fair game to have your photo taken unless you have a reasonable expectation of privacy.
The conference would most likely be considered a semi-public place and therefore have limited expectations of privacy. In general your right to privacy is dictated by the reasonable expectation of such, E.G. when at home you've got a reasonable expectation of privacy, but when out in a public location such as a mall or restaurant it isn't really reasonable to expect privacy.
Since when does everyone have the right to being offended?
To put this into context, Adria is most certainly allowed to be bothered the comments made during this conversation. However, there has to be a distinction between whether or not this is private or public.
If this fellow went on stage and then started to make these jokes, it could be considered inappropriate and as a result she would in my mind have a valid complaint. It is similar to how Michael Richards made some rather off-colour remarks about a certain ethnicity on stage, which as a result ruined his career. If he had made these comments in private, I'd imagine that he'd still be making terrible attempts at sitcom pilots.
However, when it is a conversation between two parties where she wasn't included but just ended up overhearing it, then she has no right to complain. These guys may be obnoxious to you, but you can remove yourself from the situation quite easily. Tweeting a photo of them was uncalled for however, but she could have still made a photo-less quip about them which would have been appropriate.
Public shaming people for their private conversations is uncalled for when it is specifically targeted. Adria doesn't need to apologise for being bothered over it, but she certainly should for going about it the way she did.
[edit]
Sendgrid responded:
Effective immediately, SendGrid has terminated the employment of Adria Richards. While we generally are sensitive and confidential with respect to employee matters, the situation has taken on a public nature. We have taken action that we believe is in the overall best interests of SendGrid, its employees, and our customers. As we continue to process the vast amount of information, we will post something more comprehensive.
Childishness, silliness, and lewdness is a core part of what Monty Python was about. Monty Python's style of humor was encouraged in the Python programmer culture from the beginning. It's ironic that Pycon's policy would prevent me from publicly reciting some of my favorite Flying Circus skit lines.
There is a certain category of an especially nasty person who loves taking up 'high moral ground', as it is generally promulgated by powers that be of their time, and using it to mercilessly destroy their fellow human beings. They are drunk with evil power and the sheer simplicity of it: just apply a glib label to your victim.
Nothing new under the Sun. I wonder what will be the next 'in-vogue' label. The labels change but the type of person who is fond of using them is always the same, always nasty.
Seriously? Dick jokes aren't misogynist,and the joke the guy made wouldn't even earn a PG rating. Plus, it's a private conversation. If they had said something truly sexist (eg commenting about the body parts of a female presenter) I would at least understand being offended, but public shaming would still not be justified for an eavesdropped conversation.
It sucks, but it's really apparent that this woman used the hot button issue of sexism at tech conferences (which is a legitimate problem in professional presentations) to get attention for herself and her personal "brand" of anti sexism crusader... meanwhile, crying wolf like this potentially reduces the chance that later complaints will be taken seriously, and that actual sexism will be written off as a similar case of 'help help I'm being oppressed'!
Dick jokes may or may not be misogynistic depending on the intent and the context. The default assumption that a woman's actions are to attract attention? That's misogynistic. Stop doing that.
If you feel you're being harassed, please don't tell anyone but us. Thanks."
As a general rule I think we should be working to empower people to handle situations on their own (part of that handling will likely include notifying organizers). Not disenfranchising them so they've got no recourse but to report something to a group of people selected for their ability to run a conference, not necessarily mediate disputes.
Do I happen to think that "public shaming" was appropriate here? Probably not. Do I think it's been effectively used by many groups in the past to effect change, yes. The fact that PyCon and many other conferences have adopted a code of conduct is evidence of this.
When a group asks me to constrain how I behave outside the confines of their event (on twitter for example) I tend to apply it universally. If I can't talk about the bad I most definitely will not talk about the good. I'll not have a third party filtering my communication that way.
That's not really what it says though - "Report the harassment incident (preferably in writing) to a conference staff member - all reports are confidential, please do not disclose public information about the incident until the staff have had sufficient time in which to address the situation. "
It's saying 'please tell us first and give us a chance to sort it out to everyone's satisfaction'.
> As a general rule I think we should be working to empower people to handle situations on their own
I totally agree. There is nothing here prohibiting you from telling immature people to cut it out.
> Not disenfranchising them so they've got no recourse but to report something to a group of people selected for their ability to run a conference, not necessarily mediate disputes.
The only thing this "disenfranchises" you from is trying to start lynch mobs whenever you feel like it. That is rarely an appropriate method of mediating disputes or resolving a problem, and I am totally happy that they are discouraging it.
> Do I happen to think that "public shaming" was appropriate here? Probably not. Do I think it's been effectively used by many groups in the past to effect change, yes.
Public shaming is a drastic measure. It should only be used if you have exhausted other more reasonable methods of resolving your problems. You should only reach for that hammer when you face systemic issues.
I have seen no evidence that the PyCon staff turns a blind eye to sexism or inappropriate comments. That's the kind of thing that deserves public shaming; when the system itself is broken.
> The fact that PyCon and many other conferences have adopted a code of conduct is evidence of this.
Yes, but once you have a system that is working, you threaten its efficacy by continuing to try to effect change in spite of it.
> When a group asks me to constrain how I behave outside the confines of their event (on twitter for example) I tend to apply it universally.
They are not telling you how to behave outside the confines of their event. They are telling you that the appropriate venue to bring your disputes at PyCon is to the PyCon staff, not your legion of twitter followers.
If the PyCon staff doesn't handle things appropriately, then go ahead and start handing out torches and pitchforks.
> Note: Public shaming can be counter-productive to building a strong community. PyCon does not condone nor participate in such actions out of respect
I think the "out of respect" is unnecessary and somewhat nonsensical. Out of respect for whom? I think it's fine to just say that PyCon, like any reasonable organization, doesn't participate or condone in such public shaming, period...because the reasons to not engage in it are myriad.
The comments here are curious. The bulk of them are arguing the finer points of rampant speculation. Why did the guy get fired? What were her motives? Was their conversation intended to be private?
This is all beside the point. Engaging in such conversations is feeding a witch-hunt (on either side).
The facts as I've seen them are simple. He made a penis joke which could be overheard. She took offense. He admitted it was an offensive penis joke. He got fired.
The telling point for me is her other behavior. She made a penis joke on Twitter. Unless she admits that that joke was offensive, she's a hypocrite.
I find that more offensive than the original joke. Being offended at behavior you do yourself is at best naive. At worst deliberately hypocritical and amoral.
Passive public shaming could be the future with Google Glass and like tech. Your behavior won't need to be actively "reported". If it happens within range of someone wearing Glass, what you say and do could simply be recorded, indexed, and searchable by anyone.
I don't see how penis jokes, fucking jokes, etc. are in anyway sexism, misogyny or otherwise against women. They're against prudes and the sexually repressed. They're inappropriate in some contexts.
If you feel they are sexist, etc. It is you who are being sexist and demeaning cause you've accepted the stereotype that women should be virginal, sexually repressed, are frail and weak needing protected from thoughts of sex, sexual innuendo, etc.
[+] [-] OoTheNigerian|13 years ago|reply
Adria did an arguably right thing in a wrong way at the wrong time.
1. Assuming the way she said it happened is correct, the guys behind her made a sexual (forking/fucking; Dongle/Penis) not sexist joke. If it were even to be seen as sexist, it was towards men.
2. I find it hard to see how taking their pictures and "shaming" them would have made anything thing better. It only set them up to be lynched verbally or otherwise.
3. It was a PRIVATE conversation in a public setting that was overheard. It happens to the best of us. There are 100s of bloopers on YouTube of broadcasters saying embarrassing things when the mic was supposed to be off.
4. She appears hypocritical because at the same PYCON she sexual jokes on Twitter (far much more public) while representing her company (having your company on your profile is almost same as wearing a badge at a conference. Not to include the use of the PYCON hashtag)
5. As a DEVELOPER evangelist for her company, she should be more patient with developers by a massive factor compared to people in other roles. It makes no sense evangelizing for/to people that would be uncomfortable dealing with you. Appeal to understanding, not fear.
6. It is good to know she can stand for herself. Unfortunately, I have to say she got the incident and methodology wrong.
All this will pass, and hopefully serve as a lesson for participants and us observers.
Edited: Spelling of Adria
[+] [-] rdtsc|13 years ago|reply
It seems she did 2 different things.
1) She reported an incident that made her feel uncomfortable. (I think she did the correct thing here, at least I agree with it)
2) She posted a face photo of some attendees from a sponsoring company, publicly (not just for PyCon attendees but for the whole world) along with an insult "ass clowns".
[note: 2 came before 1 as well]
2 is completely unacceptable and I am disappointed and disgusted at PyCon for not kicked her out. Image you go around with a phone snapping pictures of attendees, immediately send them to twitter with insulting tags below.
I think she should be the one to lose her job, and PyCon should issue a public apology (a little edit in Github won't do it, sorry). If she doesn't understand why what she did was wrong, she shouldn't be invited to PyCon in future years. How about this, if she comes, I won't.
PlayHeaven -- what can I say. I haven't heard of them before but they sure are on my black list as of yesterday. To terminate an employer after he has been slandered online is disrespectful. I refuse to do business with you and will go out my way to tell everyone what you did.
(There is another side issue here and I think it goes beyond hypocrisy I think it is straight malignancy. I think she pondered her odds and decided to roll the dice, given her position she quickly climbed the popularity ladder from 0 to 100 in a one day, I have no proof of this, only she knows, but her job title combined with her previous off color penis jokes on Twitter point me in that direction).
[+] [-] imsofuture|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] giardini|13 years ago|reply
She could have simply changed seats but chose to use digital methods to publicly humiliate two people, one of whom was consequently fired apparently.
"What's good for the gander is good for the goose."
BTW isn't this rather Orwellian? Anything you say anywhere can be dredged into view of the public? Is privacy possible anymore?
[+] [-] monksy|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] RyanMcGreal|13 years ago|reply
It would have been better for Adria Richards to address the matter directly rather than post a photo on twitter, but it was not wrong for her to address the matter.
Similarly, nearly everyone can agree - including Richards - that the employer who allegedly fired one of the people involved in the incident clearly overreacted.
There are learning opportunities in these incidents - opportunities to learn the best way to address a real issue when it comes up. The goal should be growing awareness and respect, apology and forgiveness, and reconciliation.
But the extreme outburst of misogyny - the insults, abuse, and physical threats including threats of rape - is perhaps the biggest learning opportunity of all: the opportunity for an entire community to recognize that it is still dysfunctional in terms of gender equality.
Edit - SendGrid just announced that they have fired Richards. Yet another instance in this cluster of reactive ugliness and missed opportunities.
[+] [-] Zikes|13 years ago|reply
This isn't a case of "it would have been better", it was a case of "what she did was clearly wrong". She overreacted as did the man's employer, and she has not shown any remorse.
> But the extreme outburst of misogyny - the insults, abuse, and physical threats including threats of rape - is perhaps the biggest learning opportunity of all: the opportunity for an entire community to recognize that it is still dysfunctional in terms of gender equality.
I haven't seen here on HN any of the insults, abuse, or threats you mentioned, nor have I made any myself. Do not blame all of us just because a vocal minority have gotten out of hand, and certainly do not use it as a tool to shame us into silence and shut down what is so far a reasoned discussion on the matter.
[+] [-] freehunter|13 years ago|reply
True, the backlash that ensued got very heated, very quickly. But here's the point: both sides are wrong. And as more discussions happen with the parties that were involved, it's seeming like Adria may have even misheard part of what she was taking offense to.
So what's the fix? Understanding. Understanding that people will be people, and you can't fix people. If someone is making you feel uncomfortable, talk to them or an authority. What Adria did was just bound to cause more trouble, and she had to know that. I agree with you that there are opportunities to learn the best way to address a real issue when it comes up. The real issue is how a media figure plays off controversy to ruin the lives of people they don't agree with. We need to address that. This has absolutely nothing to do with gender equality.
[+] [-] ebbv|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jiggy2011|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] scotty79|13 years ago|reply
Do you mean community of internet trolls?
[+] [-] smackfu|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] MartinCron|13 years ago|reply
I'm still holding some hope that after expending a lot of time and energy trying to distill an extremely gray situation into black and white, the communities involved will have something to learn from this.
[+] [-] timothyahong|13 years ago|reply
It doesn't matter if its a DDOS attack or some other outage. A quick scan of the comments leads me to believe quite a few people are actually happy with sendgrid's outage.
[+] [-] unknown|13 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] imsofuture|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] rburhum|13 years ago|reply
I have attended and spoken and several conferences (probably reaching the upper 80s) and this year's PyCon was more female-supportive than any other conference I have ever attended (Google IO, OSCON, WWDC, Where, BarCamps, etc etc).
Honestly, I was (happily) surprised about how many women attended and spoke. 20%! Of course, this number may seem low if you just blur it out, but in our industry, if you have ever attended any other tech conference, you will realize why 20% is such a high number.
The amount of attention and support PyLadies got from the PyCon/Python community was nothing short of outstanding. I sat during the PyCon PyLadies Fundraiser auction. I saw how crappy card games and posters signed by Guido and PyCon organizers sold for $300. I saw how the community managed to get "A 30-min Walk from Jack Dorsey" as one of the things to be auctioned. You don't just get that an item like that by sitting idle. Somebody from the PyCon community had to pull some strings and go through some efforts to get that for PyLadies. Heck, some guy, 1hr before the auction just gave his personal Chromebook for auction because he wanted to help the PyLadies cause. PyLadies raised 10K in less than 2hrs. All community-driven. I have never seen - in any conference - a community putting so much effort to push the goal of increasing women in tech. Never.
And yet all this drama is painting such a different picture of what I would consider the best conference I have ever attended. The biggest effort I have seen for women in tech, out-shadowed by a silly penis joke and all the drama that ensued after that.
To the PyCon organizers and PyLadies community as a whole: Don't let this get to you. You did an amazing job. To me, it was such an inspiring conference, that it will always be in my schedule. The large amount of kids coding in python and playing with their Raspberry Pis, the ad-hoc tech donations that were being done teachers, the support to PyLadies, all that stuff that really matters, did not go unnoticed. It is just that we are not as loud as the rest. But we care. Thank you!!!
[+] [-] AnIrishDuck|13 years ago|reply
This is the biggest thing that bugs me. PyCon this year was awesome, and instead of talking about record attendance and all the other positive things we're talking about a stupid dick joke.
[+] [-] jaimebuelta|13 years ago|reply
Yes, this is the saddest thing about the whole thing
[+] [-] nonrecursive|13 years ago|reply
The rest of their code is there to protect conference goers. The sections discussing harassment are there for a reason - harassment is a real problem at these events.
Similarly, conference goers should be protected from the threat of being publicized as a less-than-human creature on the Internet. There's been some discussion of the reaction to Adria and Jesse. There could just as likely have been a strong, dangerous reaction to the men who made the comments. Saying "these guys are a threat to women" on the Internet could actually put them in danger, and no one should expect to be put in that situation by attending PyCon.
[+] [-] alxp|13 years ago|reply
'dangerous'? Really? Are people who fight against sexism really 'just as likely', is in, have displayed a pattern of the same behaviour in the past? Or is this a false equivalency?
[+] [-] shadowmint|13 years ago|reply
It's not just Adria. Remember John Scalsi and "When Gut-Boys Attack"? http://whatever.scalzi.com/2012/11/14/when-gut-boys-attack/
Same thing. Take a person, smash them publicly, and hope that the everyone watching will get the idea and stop doing that thing, because of fear of similar punishment.
...but, I was under the impression there was a pretty well defined protocol for handling public sorts of hate-speech like antisemitism, and trolling, and that had been shown in all kinds of circumstances not to work.
You get all the same reactions we've seen here; a social reaction against the 'shaming' group to socially prevent similar shaming from happening in the future.
Which totally mitigates the potential benefit of the original action.
The correct responses have always been:
1) Don't engage with obvious trolls. These are a lost cause. You're wasting everyone's time.
2) Speak positively about the topic instead of negatively about the other person
3) Engage with the people who are doing the wrong thing and try to correct their behavior so they become mini-champions of 'the right way' in their own community, thus spreading correct behavioral policy organically.
I thought that this was well known stuff; we certainly covered it in college. I'm boggled by this whole bizaar extravaganza. It's such a cliche.
[+] [-] tomjen3|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] king_jester|13 years ago|reply
The main point for public airing of this information is to inform others of the attitudes and behaviors that exist and to provide evidence of an actual problem.
> 3) Engage with the people who are doing the wrong thing and try to correct their behavior so they become mini-champions of 'the right way' in their own community, thus spreading correct behavioral policy organically.
This only works if you are a member of the peer group of the people doing the wrong thing. In the case of adria richards, she is a woman of color addressing behavior that tends to come from men, so I don't think it is fair to say that this would be a realistic thing to do.
[+] [-] d4vlx|13 years ago|reply
If someone says something in private that you disagree with then you should bring it up with them in private or get and intermediary, like the conference organizers to. They may have been very sensitive to gender issues and sympathetic to her agenda but she will never know because she never put the effort into discussing it with them.
[+] [-] shocks|13 years ago|reply
This is a problem with a person and her over zealous and ridiculous actions.
Let's be clear here, there should be nothing wrong with making dick jokes to your friend. Did he say "Haha, look at these dongles. They look like dicks. But we don't need them because have dicks! Maybe they should give these to the women so they can be better programmers with big dicks like us."? No.
We are living in a world where people increasingly feel the need to be "personally offended" by things that don't even involve them.
What if the male in question made an Englishman, Irishman, and Scotishman joke? Hell, they're pretty fucking funny! And you know what? They involve the Englishman doing something desperately stupid. Being an Englishman, am I offended? Fuck no.
This entire situation is beyond ridiculous.
[+] [-] sp332|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jagermo|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] potatolicious|13 years ago|reply
Even in Germany this is legal. The right to photograph someone is usually delineated by the principle of "reasonable expectation of privacy". Note that this is a legal term that has been defined both through legislation and via decades of case law in many countries - so personal definitions of it don't apply here.
Common places where courts have upheld the reasonable expectation of privacy include restrooms (including public ones), a home, a hotel room, etc. A conference talk is not one of these places. Which is to say, people are free to photograph at will.
Note that should the property be private, the owners (or agents thereof) are entitled to disallow photography. Note also, importantly, that the right to disallow photography does not include the right to confiscate any photographs already taken. The most the property owner can do is remove the individual from their premises or have them arrested for trespassing.
Note also that while photographing someone in a public place is not a violation of any criminal law in most Western countries, it does not shield you from civil liabilities - you can still be pursued for damages, libel, or defamation (which seem like it may be relevant in this situation).
There are some countries and territories with substantially stricter laws regarding the likeness of people. Japan and Quebec for example are places where the right to photograph someone in public is not protected by default.
[+] [-] 0x44|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] shardling|13 years ago|reply
(There's other stuff that comes into play when you try to profit off such photographs, so the situation can get more complicated than that.)
[+] [-] freejoe76|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] orclev|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] coldtea|13 years ago|reply
Especially when the harassment is "two friends taking to each other in some row".
[+] [-] afreak|13 years ago|reply
To put this into context, Adria is most certainly allowed to be bothered the comments made during this conversation. However, there has to be a distinction between whether or not this is private or public.
If this fellow went on stage and then started to make these jokes, it could be considered inappropriate and as a result she would in my mind have a valid complaint. It is similar to how Michael Richards made some rather off-colour remarks about a certain ethnicity on stage, which as a result ruined his career. If he had made these comments in private, I'd imagine that he'd still be making terrible attempts at sitcom pilots.
However, when it is a conversation between two parties where she wasn't included but just ended up overhearing it, then she has no right to complain. These guys may be obnoxious to you, but you can remove yourself from the situation quite easily. Tweeting a photo of them was uncalled for however, but she could have still made a photo-less quip about them which would have been appropriate.
Public shaming people for their private conversations is uncalled for when it is specifically targeted. Adria doesn't need to apologise for being bothered over it, but she certainly should for going about it the way she did.
[edit]
Sendgrid responded:
Effective immediately, SendGrid has terminated the employment of Adria Richards. While we generally are sensitive and confidential with respect to employee matters, the situation has taken on a public nature. We have taken action that we believe is in the overall best interests of SendGrid, its employees, and our customers. As we continue to process the vast amount of information, we will post something more comprehensive.
[+] [-] kjackson2012|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] pcote|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] rozap|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] SagelyGuru|13 years ago|reply
Pagan, heretic, catholic, protestant, blasphemer, republican, communist, anti-communist, racist, sexist....
Nothing new under the Sun. I wonder what will be the next 'in-vogue' label. The labels change but the type of person who is fond of using them is always the same, always nasty.
[+] [-] fibbery|13 years ago|reply
It sucks, but it's really apparent that this woman used the hot button issue of sexism at tech conferences (which is a legitimate problem in professional presentations) to get attention for herself and her personal "brand" of anti sexism crusader... meanwhile, crying wolf like this potentially reduces the chance that later complaints will be taken seriously, and that actual sexism will be written off as a similar case of 'help help I'm being oppressed'!
[+] [-] alxp|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] throwawayabc|13 years ago|reply
"Dear Attendees,
If you feel you're being harassed, please don't tell anyone but us. Thanks."
As a general rule I think we should be working to empower people to handle situations on their own (part of that handling will likely include notifying organizers). Not disenfranchising them so they've got no recourse but to report something to a group of people selected for their ability to run a conference, not necessarily mediate disputes.
Do I happen to think that "public shaming" was appropriate here? Probably not. Do I think it's been effectively used by many groups in the past to effect change, yes. The fact that PyCon and many other conferences have adopted a code of conduct is evidence of this.
When a group asks me to constrain how I behave outside the confines of their event (on twitter for example) I tend to apply it universally. If I can't talk about the bad I most definitely will not talk about the good. I'll not have a third party filtering my communication that way.
[+] [-] Nursie|13 years ago|reply
It's saying 'please tell us first and give us a chance to sort it out to everyone's satisfaction'.
That's really not tricky at all.
[+] [-] AnIrishDuck|13 years ago|reply
I totally agree. There is nothing here prohibiting you from telling immature people to cut it out.
> Not disenfranchising them so they've got no recourse but to report something to a group of people selected for their ability to run a conference, not necessarily mediate disputes.
The only thing this "disenfranchises" you from is trying to start lynch mobs whenever you feel like it. That is rarely an appropriate method of mediating disputes or resolving a problem, and I am totally happy that they are discouraging it.
> Do I happen to think that "public shaming" was appropriate here? Probably not. Do I think it's been effectively used by many groups in the past to effect change, yes.
Public shaming is a drastic measure. It should only be used if you have exhausted other more reasonable methods of resolving your problems. You should only reach for that hammer when you face systemic issues.
I have seen no evidence that the PyCon staff turns a blind eye to sexism or inappropriate comments. That's the kind of thing that deserves public shaming; when the system itself is broken.
> The fact that PyCon and many other conferences have adopted a code of conduct is evidence of this.
Yes, but once you have a system that is working, you threaten its efficacy by continuing to try to effect change in spite of it.
> When a group asks me to constrain how I behave outside the confines of their event (on twitter for example) I tend to apply it universally.
They are not telling you how to behave outside the confines of their event. They are telling you that the appropriate venue to bring your disputes at PyCon is to the PyCon staff, not your legion of twitter followers.
If the PyCon staff doesn't handle things appropriately, then go ahead and start handing out torches and pitchforks.
[+] [-] nawitus|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] danso|13 years ago|reply
I think the "out of respect" is unnecessary and somewhat nonsensical. Out of respect for whom? I think it's fine to just say that PyCon, like any reasonable organization, doesn't participate or condone in such public shaming, period...because the reasons to not engage in it are myriad.
[+] [-] adekok|13 years ago|reply
This is all beside the point. Engaging in such conversations is feeding a witch-hunt (on either side).
The facts as I've seen them are simple. He made a penis joke which could be overheard. She took offense. He admitted it was an offensive penis joke. He got fired.
The telling point for me is her other behavior. She made a penis joke on Twitter. Unless she admits that that joke was offensive, she's a hypocrite.
I find that more offensive than the original joke. Being offended at behavior you do yourself is at best naive. At worst deliberately hypocritical and amoral.
[+] [-] ricleal|13 years ago|reply
https://www.facebook.com/SendGrid/posts/10151502570463967
[+] [-] scott_meade|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] njharman|13 years ago|reply
If you feel they are sexist, etc. It is you who are being sexist and demeaning cause you've accepted the stereotype that women should be virginal, sexually repressed, are frail and weak needing protected from thoughts of sex, sexual innuendo, etc.