> But I'm glad he stayed honest to himself instead and didn't have a PR team ghostwrite his thoughts.

If there's one thing I learned in this debacle is "I should spend 1-2 days and send to a close friend before hitting publish on a firey reply." The way Andrew rephrased the closing section is the kind of thing I should publish on the first edit in similar scenarios.

▲

bourbonproof 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Unlikely a useful lesson here. If it would have been written as "political correct" version up to the point of not calling Jarred out at all would have missed the core message. The fact that it was written blunt is the reason it went viral.

▲

bob001 an hour ago | parent [-]

Viral is not an inherently good thing unless you're an influencer. Not all publicity is good publicity.

	▲	dakolli 10 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		uhhh, that's not how the how that figure speech goes. There's a reason why people say all publicity is good publicity, and you can't just flip that to fit your perspective.

▲

stingraycharles 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I also don’t really like his closing section, it has a big “sorry but not sorry” feeling to it.

	▲	rafterydj an hour ago \| parent [-]
		I read that as him beginning the healing stages. Acknowledging his flaws as soon as he could even if he couldn't change what he already said - because that post did blow up, if he had taken the whole thing down it may have just exacerbated things.

▲

tonypace an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

I think if the last decade has taught us anything, its that decorum has zero to negative value in public communication. People pay attention to drama, and you need attention to be heard. When the penalty for rudeness is gone, just go for contention.

	▲	bob001 an hour ago \| parent [-]
		> penalty for rudeness is gone I assume Andrew's goal isn't to be a viral influencer but to achieve some type of long term impact or goal. Programmers don't pick languages based on maximal vitriol and if anything do the opposite.