[bhouston]

This is a polemic: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polemic

It is not a means of trying to fix the issue, but rather a strong worded, accusatory, defensive blast at his critics by someone who believes they were wronged and others are at fault.

This is not a "how to get to yes" type response, but rather a response that just inflames a situation, and causes everyone to dig in.

There is going to be no winner going down this path, just losers all around and a lot of wasted energy and time.

Yuk.

[eric_b]

Sounds like you'd already made up your mind about Rod, and weren't keen to hear the other side.

I, on the other hand, was curious to read his version of things so I'm glad he took the time to offer a detailed reply. After reading his "polemic" I felt he was rational, composed, and defended his actions and character rather well. I came to the conclusion that the pitchfork wielding folks were slinging a lot of unsubstantiated accusations that look a lot like moral authoritarianism.

My read was that he diffused a lot of possible indignation and inflammation with his word choice and tone. He was more conciliatory than I would have been in his position.

[bhouston]

> Sounds like you'd already made up your mind about Rod, and weren't keen to hear the other side.

I actually only read his side, although I stopped after a couple screen fulls as I recognized from experience that what I was reading was not a productive response to the situation at hand, but a defensive one.

[dmpk2k]

Of course it's a defensive one. He's the person being accused! ಠ_ಠ

God forbid someone defend themselves after being publicly and on-record dragged through the mud. This isn't going away for him even if he stepped down and disappeared from the scene entirely.

[kuyan]

> I recognized from experience that what I was reading was not a productive response to the situation at hand, but a defensive one.

What would a productive response be? I agree that getting unnecessarily mired in drama is counterproductive, but I don't think that these accusations could have been reasonably ignored, nor do I know what Rod could (or should) have done differently.

[bhouston]

In real-life, outside of 10,000 word github issues, one should call those you are having problems with and talk about it. That is how you resolve these issues. You show empathy, you show understanding, you take more responsibility that you deserve because you have a strong ego, you focus on the future and how best to achieve joint success, you show some flexibility, you get a mutually beneficial resolution or an agreed plan of action that should lead to a better outcome. This is best done on a one-by-one basis. And people come to your side or at least understand you.

You need to not be accusatory, nor defensive.

This is the age old way of dealing with issues in a productive fashion. Read getting to "Getting to yes" or try getting married.

What I read in this github issue is just immature, very ineffective problem solving from I guess someone who doesn't know better.

[echaozh]

When people defame you in the public, to talk to people in the private don't solve all the problems. The public need to hear from both sides.

You don't like to hear the defense, all right. Just don't try to stop other people from hearing it.

[bhouston]

> When people defame you in the public, to talk to people in the private don't solve all the problems. The public need to hear from both sides.

Only if you want to run a negative sum game for all involved. This is a horrible strategy to engage in. You only end up also wrecking your own reputation and others and wasting a ton of time.

The socially mature thing to do is resolve this behind closed doors and be flexible as I suggested.

He may get some success by playing the martyr, but it will be success that occurs by his aggression, stubbornness and by expending more efforts in polemics than others. In the end he might still be standing but everyone around him will be wounded metaphorically because of this (mostly via huge wastes of time because of difficult conversations and departures of people from the project.)

Anyone who wants to run a company focused on results and to avoid unnecessary drama should avoid this type of character like the plague.

This behavior he is currently engaging in is a huge red flag if you recognize it for what it is.

Again, he is engaging in a strategy that forces everyone into a negative sum game, which is itself a form of aggression -- and it is easy to recognize from this github issue as I've seen this before close up. It is not a smart thing to do and should have been avoided by doing things differently long ago.

He can still pull up by basically retracting all of this and re-engaging in a mature and flexible manner that shows some contrition/empathy -- but that requires a strong ego, social maturity, and flexibility which may not be something that is possible on his part at this time. Everyone he is dealing with would love that I am sure, even at this stage, because it will stop the negative sum game.

[_kyjg]

bhouston's statements are far more nuanced than saying that they don't want to hear the defense or attempting to prevent others from hearing it.

[phiskk]

Perhaps you should be telling this to those who launched a witchhunt against Rod because he undermined their oppression tool. They certainly didn't try to "call those you are having problems with and talk about it."

[phiskk]

When people have already mounted an attack, a polite defense seems a very reasonable response.

[hoorayimhelping]

>I actually only read his side, although I stopped after a couple screen fulls as I recognized from experience...

So what you're saying is you made up your mind (based on past experience) and weren't really keen to read the full text because of that?