Wow, another community lists degenerates into PC hand wringing, this
time as a result of a lazy recruiter spamming the list.
I find the asymmetry of all this ironic: a recruiter spamming a list and
then throwing a hissy fit when people light heartedly jest about the
post, followed by 30+ messages of discussion about how we're hurting her
feelings and making her feel unwelcome.
Sorry, but the signal-to-noise ratio of this list pretty much just
dropped to zero for me, so I'll be leaving now...
Chris
On 06/12/2016 16:49, Steve Holden wrote:
Yes, it's a pity the more rational feedback didn't come first, but
knees do tend to jerk at recruitment communications. S
Steve Holden
On Tue, Dec 6, 2016 at 3:29 PM, Tom Wright <t...@tatw.name
<mailto:t...@tatw.name>> wrote:
Perhaps replying immediately doesn't count as pause, but I hope
this constitutes thought.
I would make three points:
I. The tone of the response may in part be due to the recruitment
topic more than anything else. This is unfortunately a rather
fraught subject. Bulk recruitment ads are so common it is
unsurprising that people would view them as a piece of text rather
than a correspondence with a real person.
II. I suspect that many readers do not view this list as for
communication that requires "professional" standards. And might
view the imposition of professionalism in this context as
problematic.
This represents the key conflict at the heart of codes of conduct:
in-group behaviour that can be damagingly exclusionary, versus the
imposition of strict rules that impinge upon an informal setting.
III. I don't know if the guidance on this list for jobs posts is
particularly clear, and if I am not mistaken is mostly held in
people's heads. An unfortunate side effect of no clearly defined
rules is that the informal rules can be unforced rather unfriendlily.
On 6 Dec 2016 1:46 p.m., "David Wilson" <dw+python...@hmmz.org
<mailto:dw%2bpython...@hmmz.org>> wrote:
While I quite enjoyed this thread and, especially considering the
recruiter's followup, it appears to have somewhat been in bad
taste.
I can't speak for others, but I'm in my mid 30s and regularly
confuse
license/licence, prescribe/proscribe and without doubt a bunch
more,
either through finger memory or plain old thinko. It would not be
without embarrassment to have strangers publicly ridicule such
errors,
especially in a professional context as occurred here.
This is a minor incident, but it's from a class where the
underlying
insensitivity has forced other communities to grow a Code of
Conduct,
therefore perhaps it's worth taking a little pause to reflect
on it.
David
On Tue, Dec 06, 2016 at 01:57:00PM +0000, Nicholas H.Tollervey
wrote:
> On 06/12/16 13:20, Roger Gammans wrote:
> > If your set of Prinicpia is Russell's not Newton's you may not
> > have simple values.
>
> Our principal aim is to express a complete and consistent set of
> misspelled principles.
>
> _______________________________________________
> python-uk mailing list
> python-uk@python.org <mailto:python-uk@python.org>
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-uk
<https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-uk>
_______________________________________________
python-uk mailing list
python-uk@python.org <mailto:python-uk@python.org>
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-uk
<https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-uk>
_______________________________________________
python-uk mailing list
python-uk@python.org <mailto:python-uk@python.org>
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-uk
<https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-uk>
_______________________________________________
python-uk mailing list
python-uk@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-uk
_______________________________________________
python-uk mailing list
python-uk@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-uk
