Well said Guyren. On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 12:10 AM, Guyren Howe <[email protected]> wrote:
> Diverting slightly from the “Job opportunity” fracas. a couple of people > have explained to me why Andreas’ comment about an HP job posting: > > > You're talking about the company that just last month reported the worst > loss in its 73-year history and is on the brink of laying off 29,000 > people, right? > > > > More importantly, though, do we get a ping-pong table? > > > was unwelcoming. It would seem that he was taken to be saying that > obviously no-one would jump at such an offer following all these layoffs, > and that it generally belittles HP, so might offend someone who works there > or is considering working there. This is further taken as Andreas saying to > Mark that he needn’t have bothered to post because the offer is clearly > ridiculous. And I guess that therefore Mark is a silly fellow, who should > give up recruiting and consider basket weaving, and generally reconsider > his life because he must be a failure. > > This interpretation is a revelation to me. I took Andreas to be talking to > the community, not to Mark, and to be saying to us that, given HP’s current > troubles, it was amusing (and it is!) that HP is hiring for such a > position. Furthermore, one might wonder how such a position can seem > attractive in light of these issues. Perhaps Mark or someone else with > relevant information might care to comment? > > Ah, but the point is how Mark might interpret Andreas’ comment! Because we > want to welcome MPs (or PMs? What is such a thing anyway?), and poor, > fragile Mark might take us to be belittling his job posting, and thus > questioning his manhood, and thus scaring him away. How treating poor, > fragile Mark like this intellectual invalid isn’t insulting to him I’m not > quite sure. Anyway. > > I put it to you that: > > - we should assume that everyone in our community is reasonable, > charitable and friendly until clearly demonstrated to be otherwise; > - we don’t have to try very hard to find a reasonable, charitable and > friendly interpretation of what Andreas wrote. To insist otherwise is to > insist that Mark is not himself capable of finding all of these > interpretations, and furthermore that his delicate ego needs defending from > such complications, which I propose is more insulting to Mark that anything > Andreas might have been taken to be saying; > - if you think there is some danger that poor Mark’s delicate ego might > have been so grievously offended by a particular interpretation of Andreas’ > throwaway joke that he might abandon us as a lost cause, then you should > politely and privately ask Andreas to clarify what he meant, or if need be > publicly and politely offer that while Andreas is a likable and inoffensive > fellow, it is possible that you interpreted what he said in xyz way, and if > so, you should know that this is almost certainly not what he meant, and > really we all love you, Mark, and we’d love to hear more about how we > should go work at HP. > > But really, someone who works in HR or recruiting is certainly going to > have a particularly thick skin, and I’m sure Mark thinks all this is > ridiculous, if he’s reading it at all. > > Can we not just all try to be polite, friendly and above all charitable? > Can we treat our interlocutors, both regulars and irregulars, as grown-ups, > capable of reasonable and nuanced interpretation and intent? Can we not > assume malice unless malice is clearly demonstrated? Please? > > -- > SD Ruby mailing list > [email protected] > http://groups.google.com/group/sdruby > -- SD Ruby mailing list [email protected] http://groups.google.com/group/sdruby
