It's becoming the norm in some communities. For example, Mozilla/Rust has a lot of people like that, and one of the core team members has contributed to #hnwatch Twitter tag linked below.
People from that circle were proposing the idea of creating 'black lists' to make people unemployable for political reasons; they managed to get Brendan Eich expelled from Mozilla; they're pushing for "Codes of conducts", which again aim at expelling people from open source communities for political reasons - eg things they said in completely unrelated places, like their own Twitter feeds (see "Opalgate").
Also see PronounGate, DongleGate, past scandals at Github (meritocracy rug, Julie-Ann Horvath departure), discussions/scandals around CoC/"Contributor Covenant", etc etc etc.
One thing they frequently claim, is that they are NOT censoring anything, people are free to do whatever they want.
Yet they keep pushing for this behaviour (black listing people that disagree with feminism, nagging companies until they decide to not launch products in some markets because fear of feminist backlash, and so on).
I honestly don't see how they don't notice how illogical their position are.
>> I honestly don't see how they don't notice how illogical their position are.
I have a friend on Twitter who's a raging feminist. I asked her if she was concerned about Carly Fiorina being excluded from the GOP debate since she was the only woman and actually had more votes in the Iowa caucus than two other male candidates who they kept in the debate.
Her response was that she never cared about any GOP candidate. It just makes no sense to me. If you're for women's rights, then it shouldn't matter what race, religion or political party someone is, in order to support them - they're women, and should be supported regardless.
Exactly it, but your friend is just a typical hypocrite. She says she is for women's rights, but is really just for any woman who has the same worldview as her and f the rest.
> If you're for women's rights, then it shouldn't matter what race, religion or political party someone is, in order to support them - they're women, and should be supported regardless.
WTH are you talking about? If you're for women's rights you support people who are also for women's rights, regardless of race, religion or gender they are.
I don't know who Carly Fiorina is, but I know Margaret Thatcher, and she did nothing for women. By your logic though, just because she was a woman, feminists should have supported her over men in the opposing (socialist) party that supported women's rights?
if we think some pattern should be called "censorship", then it is called that. if your interlocutor refuses to move beyond "argument about definition of words" and you still want to communicate, you then have to taboo the word, which slows your thinking+communication down a bit, but so be it.
The people who would point it out are basically in fatigue mode from talking about it so much. How he was not escorted out of the building after that tweet is beyond me. Seeing the slide is just as bad.
No hatred ever got fixed by pouring more hatred into the cauldron. Sure, you can be the conquerer, but you just created more people gunning for you. If you are not about equality and love of all, then you are just another part of the problem. It is very much like the H1-B threads. Its important to see the system is broken and not the H1-B applicants doing the best they can in the system.
I sit here on a reservation and see the problems. A university adding requirements in a job search that weren't there before for one. I've lived through a bit of it, and people like him won't solve anything. All they will do is cost the company money in lawsuits.
Want to fix diversity? Fix the diversity and STEM education in pre-K and K-6. We learn to dream then. Let's think about everyone having a chance to dream of STEM.
It rather seems that the entire thread is now about this totally minor and uninteresting point, all the while ignoring the GitHub-the-company-is-broken argument. The inability to understand priorities is not surprising but talent isn't leaving GH because of reverse racism: it's the horrible leadership and the dismantling of one of the most innovative workplace cultures that suck.
Wasn't it pretty obvious github was broken when the hovarth episode happened?
They are in a special cognitive dissonance zone, they are wildly successful and that cures a lot of problems. They have time and money to worry about issues that aren't the products, and be vocal about it. Now the community seems to be mostly pacified, they like git and github has the mindshare, but they are coasting. Or so it seems, maybe the enterprise version I've never used has some badass features.
I had the same reaction. I'm surprised nobody else has noticed this and made a comment about it.