gruntmaster9000

8 ms·

1.
by gruntmaster9000 12y ago
(My other reply is dead, apparently?) The point is we can’t be truly meritocratic. It’s a utopic ideal that doesn’t hold up in the real world. Those who are deciding what merit is are the ones who already have power. Also, there are many ba
2.
by gruntmaster9000 12y ago
Missing the point. Meritocracy is not something to aspire to. In practice it masks and reinforces power structures, increasing inequality: > The main finding is consistent across the three studies: when an organization is explicitly pres
3.
by gruntmaster9000 12y ago
Negative reaction to “meritocracy” is hardly knee-jerk. In fact, the word was coined as criticism of the concept: http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2001/jun/29/comment
4.
by gruntmaster9000 12y ago
I read this as an apology for not having the preventative processes or environment in place. Despite no legal wrong doing, they still failed miserably when faced with this situation. To their credit, they know this and are working to fix it
5.
An Untold Startup Story(modelviewculture.com)
32 points by gruntmaster9000 12y ago|9 comments
6.
by gruntmaster9000 12y ago
> I suspect that what founders really fear is being misunderstood in their motivations as their companies grow. They fear that employees view them as disconnected and only trying to build empires of gold. These are the fears of a bad fou
7.
by gruntmaster9000 13y ago
> We aren't that far off from the Egyptians that were using hundreds of thousands of slaves per pyramid. It's a good thing that we've transcended the necessity for hundreds of thousands of slaves when raising buildings, do
8.
by gruntmaster9000 13y ago
Of course not. But don’t use meritocracy as an excuse to not be proactive about diversity.
9.
by gruntmaster9000 13y ago
Death by a thousand cuts: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creeping_normality
10.
by gruntmaster9000 13y ago
> For me, two adult individual can do whatever the hack they want to do, if it is legal and they are both consent of doing it. Not at all true in a professional environment. And that statement doesn’t even correspond with the story. The
11.
by gruntmaster9000 13y ago
Meritocracy as an ideal may not be intrinsically sexist or racist, but declaring an organization a meritocracy doesn’t automatically eliminate existing sexism, racism, etc, and instead masks it. That’s the problem. It’s not unlike the “stru
12.
by gruntmaster9000 13y ago
No, it’s “X isn’t really Y, despite what we say, and it’s actually harmful, so let’s stop reinforcing problems by pretending that it is Y”. As being discussed elsewhere in this thread, the problem with meritocracy is that it’s dependent on
13.
by gruntmaster9000 13y ago
Horvath mentioned on Twitter they supported her coming forward about her experience: nrrrdcore: I'm thrilled to be joining a new team in just a few weeks and they completely support me coming forward. https://twitte
14.
by gruntmaster9000 13y ago
The BitBucket issue tracker is clunky garbage by comparison, and its general UI doesn’t feel as well thought out. GitHub as a tool is really great. That said, company values matter .
15.
by gruntmaster9000 13y ago
Sort of. “Merit” is more a measure of those groups’ definitions of success. Calling it a meritocracy overly simplifies the circumstances for that success, often reinforcing the power relationships.
16.
by gruntmaster9000 13y ago
It’s not “get rid of meritocracy” but rather “recognize that it isn’t really meritocracy and it’s preserving problems”.
17.
by gruntmaster9000 13y ago
Steve Klabnik explains it well: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7405881 In short, it’s a not-really-present ideal that’s often used to mask the existing power relationships that are really responsible for people being
18.
by gruntmaster9000 13y ago
Gross attempt at rationalizing inappropriate behavior. Plus, the male developer in your story would also be considered unprofessional.
19.
by gruntmaster9000 13y ago
Sass by default sets UTF-8 encoding.
20.
by gruntmaster9000 13y ago
Yes exactly. It’s the host’s job to talk to the audience. Unless you have something to specifically say to those watching, you’re better off focusing on the host and letting the director do their thing. It’s awkward when guests look at the
21.
by gruntmaster9000 13y ago
Because someone thought it was interesting enough to submit, and others thought it was interesting enough to vote up. Pretty simple, really.
22.
by gruntmaster9000 13y ago
The blog theme was made by a Chinese developer, which is probably why that is set the way it is.
23.
by gruntmaster9000 13y ago
It’s seen wider acceptance. Some argue even more so than LESS. Sass is very popular in the Drupal community, for instance.
24.
by gruntmaster9000 13y ago
Leak is the wrong term, and it’s doubtfully a deliberate marketing move either. More like, “suddenly being noticed because a bunch of GitHubbers followed the @AtomEditor account on Twitter”. Also, despite the plethora of repositories, the a
25.
by gruntmaster9000 13y ago
Ideas are valueless, not worthless. Obligatory link to Derek Sivers’ ideas being multipliers: http://sivers.org/multiply
26.
by gruntmaster9000 13y ago
Not a lot, and that’s the point. If the company can’t dedicate resources to train these people, they aren’t worth sticking with.
27.
by gruntmaster9000 13y ago
Doubtful. The Times has been moving away from pageviews as a metric (see their recent redesign).
28.
by gruntmaster9000 13y ago
Gender identity is not at all the “grammatical expression of a sex within an environment’s constraints”. It is ‘a person's sense of self as a member of a particular gender.‘ — http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/gend
29.
by gruntmaster9000 13y ago
You are confusing grammatical gender with gender identity. It is also informed by sex, but that is only one influence.
30.
by gruntmaster9000 13y ago
Gender != sex.

More ›