| ▲ | elktown 3 days ago |
| No, it's embarrassing being obsessed with good tone to the point that people behaving badly should never be called out for it. The article provides good background into how it got to this point - and it fits well with doing an opportunistic AI rewrite after being acquired by an AI provider. |
|
| ▲ | orangedog 3 days ago | parent | next [-] |
| It is not about good tone it's about not being hateful and rude. Why is this that hard to pick apart? Why do devs believe being rude is somehow a sign of honesty? They are orthogonal. This post needed none of the mean-spirited attacks that it contained to make its points. It is only hurt by the attacks as seen by the focus on "tone" throughout these comments. |
| |
| ▲ | elktown 3 days ago | parent | next [-] | | It's all about tone. The original bad behavior is done without overt "bad tone" but if the response to it is spicy then the former is ignored and the latter is condemned despite being of lesser severity. I can buy that it can be good corporate politics to not upset the superficial crowd that will immediately lash out on tone, but I will not judge someone rightfully reacting on bad behavior that they've been on the receiving end of. Also, I didn't say being rude is a sign of honesty, that's you extrapolating. | | |
| ▲ | orangedog 3 days ago | parent [-] | | You can call it superficiality but there are just some of us who believe that treating people right is the core of this. You're viewing that as some kind of superficial virtue signaling but if we're not treating people with respect then there's not a point in doing any of this, it gets to the very thing that Kelley is complaining about. | | |
| ▲ | elktown 3 days ago | parent [-] | | I just don't think it's fair to expect people getting shit to be expected to use kid gloves when responding to it. | | |
| ▲ | orangedog 3 days ago | parent | next [-] | | It's not about kid gloves. There is a ways of reponing to this which isn't this ugly. That's part of being a leader. | | |
| ▲ | elktown 3 days ago | parent [-] | | I guess I don't value the stoic leadership ideal as much as you do. |
| |
| ▲ | Tadpole9181 3 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | When did Jarred say anything but kind things to Andrew? | | |
| ▲ | elktown 3 days ago | parent [-] | | There are more ways to behave badly than to call someone bad words. If you’re being that literal. | | |
| ▲ | ai_critic 3 days ago | parent | next [-] | | Okay, then what did he do? | |
| ▲ | Tadpole9181 3 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | Please, enumerate them. | | |
| ▲ | elktown 2 days ago | parent [-] | | To summarise it, as I believe this would be an exercise in futility to discuss with you: Bun/Jarred very obviously threw Zig under the bus when it was opportune and self-serving to do so after joining Anthropic. | | |
| ▲ | Tadpole9181 a day ago | parent [-] | | So you don't have any. And after reading all of Jarred's posts and responses you found that he repeatedly thanked Zig and said he respected Andrew but that, after donating over a hundred thousand dollars to their work, his project had different needs than before and needed to change stack? Incredible display of bad faith discussion. You should be ashamed. | | |
| ▲ | elktown 8 hours ago | parent [-] | | Sigh, as expected. Incredible display of being unable to read between the lines and be dazzled by superficiality. But I don't expect even base levels of street smartness here. Why do nerds on a "well ackshually"-mission always think they can demand work of other people? "Please pointlessly spend time to walk me through something my comment history clearly shows I've already made up my mind on". I'm not your fucking caretaker. | | |
| ▲ | rowanG077 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | Nothing superficial about 100K USD donations. I have personally seen nothing but good vibes coming from Bun to Zig and Andrew. Re-writing is not "throwing under the bus" you make it out to be. | | |
| ▲ | elktown 39 minutes ago | parent [-] | | I’m sure lots of rich assholes take comfort from this unfortunately common attitude. This entire blog post exists due to someone clearly needing to vent, try to work backwards from that. If things were as peachy amicable as you guys imagine, this thread wouldn’t exist. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| ▲ | voidhorse 3 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | What you are asking for is a slippery slope. The history of humanity is full of biting polemics and attacks on the character of others, just read Voltaire. Sometimes, attacks are deserved. Yes, a world in which everyone is professional and "plays nice" sounds great but it also quickly becomes a mechanism for suppression of the truth. Not the situation here, but "decorum" expectations are sometimes precisely one of the functions that help bad people maintain power (consider how difficult it can be for minorities or marginalized people to speak truthfully about what's happened to them). Sometimes one person being blunt, honest, and a little rude is a necessary step in clearing ground for others to be more upfront about the bad behavior of individuals. |
|
|
| ▲ | mattstir 3 days ago | parent | prev [-] |
| The argument isn't to avoid calling out "bad" behaviour, it's that you can do so with a professional (or at least not actively childish) tone. Using phrases like "stinky manager" while taking multiple jabs at Jarred's personal and educational background (implying by not going to university he was too stupid to think critically about his path forward) paints a weirdly childish yet elitist viewpoint. The blog post reads as vindictive, akin to something along the lines of "screw you kid, glad to be rid of you, and thanks for the $120,000 btw." I don't interact with Zig or Bun, but I certainly haven't been enticed to try Zig after this. |
| |
| ▲ | elktown 3 days ago | parent [-] | | I'm sorry but I honestly think this is just being superficial wanting to push it through some kind of corporate speak filter to be able to stomach it. > Using phrases like "stinky manager" I would've used a worse adjective given the WLB tweet etc. Is it just because stinky itself has a childish tone to it rather than something like shitty? Or do one need to reach to somewhat open-ended terms like "questionable" to be palatable? > implying by not going to university he was too stupid to think critically about his path forward I read that as emphasizing the Thiel Fellowship part, not the lack of university education. > I don't interact with Zig or Bun, but I certainly haven't been enticed to try Zig after this. I'm so tired of "I've never played [game] & have never had any intention to play [game] whatsoever, but given [newfound-grievance] I wont buy it!"-style dismissals - talking about childishness. | | |
|
