[danielatc]

Fortunately a lot of people within the thread can defend my point better than I can.

I prefer to listen rather than to speak up, but in this instance and context I felt it was the right thing to speak up for once to raise awareness in a circle that otherwise might be oblivious to the issue.

And yes the article I linked was certainly not the best. It was simply one example out of many that makes a case of him being problematic as I couldn't find a more canonical piece on the spot.

[iser]

I think you injected politics into something that is not the place for. Yes these issues are important but please understand that there are right times and settings for these discussions. To be honest, I was appalled at your comment and I completely understand Kovarex's reaction. He clearly did not word it tactfully, but I understand why he was upset.

[danielatc]

As I tried to state in my initial post: giving a problematic person like Uncle Bob a platform is a political act. Irrespective of whether it was conscious or not. So I wanted to educate as I assumed no bad intentions.

And to summarize the point I'm trying to make: promoting toxic people will drive away lots of underrepresented people from our industry which to me is a massive net loss.

[js8]

I originally didn't want to get pulled into this discussion, but I had to respond elsewhere, ergo alea iacta est.

> giving a problematic person like Uncle Bob a platform is a political act

If we are talking only about platforming UB's technical opinions, then it's not a political act. Unless you think that everything done in public should be, a priori, considered to be a political act.

I was born in the same country as Kovarex, about the same time ago, and at the time, we lived in a system where everything happening in public sphere was considered a political act. Even lack of participation - you didn't put up a flag or go to a march at certain state holidays, and people would say, he is suspicious, and "politically unreliable" (which would block things like promotions at your job or if your children could study).

It wasn't a society you would want to live in, I guarantee you that. So please, think twice before you call something like that a political act.

[carbonguy]

For what it's worth, and to try and balance the scales here, I'm of the opinion that:

1) you were 100% in the right to point out that Uncle Bob is a problematic figure

2) promoting his work while ignoring 1) is, in fact, a political act as you pointed out

3) you expressed these views very tactfully and clearly (to my eye as a native English speaker - I wouldn't have known it was a second language for you had you not mentioned it)

4) based on this thread and the post you made on Reddit, there was no call whatsoever for you to "shove it up your ass" or be called toxic or anything of the sort

From where I sit, you were in the right and you remain in the right.

[krzyk]

> 2) promoting his work while ignoring 1) is, in fact, a political act as you pointed out

How can it be a political act? A political act is bringing something completely unrelated (like Robin's stance on funding police) to a technical discussion about TDD.

I to lived in oppressive (communist) regime like creator of Factorio, and political party (The Party) forced everything to be political. Going to church, not eating meat, not going to a rally, ot watching TV.

Now we want to just discuss a topic without dragging politics into this.

[krzyk]

How is Robert C. Martin toxic? Reading the examples pointed above don't make him toxic (and making fun of "Uncle" makes the first article completely unreliable, not to mention the completely of the hook bit about police).

And even if he was toxic - mixing personality with articles should not take place ever. If you disagree with the articles write so, but don't attack personally.