[dminik]

As someone from a cultural background that is considered very direct and blunt, I can say that there is a rather fine line between being direct and being an asshole.

This post devolves into a personal attack one sentence in. There was no reason to go into Jared's life at all to begin with. The entire post doesn't need to exist at all if you're confident that Bun leaving will have zero or even positive impact. Why turn an already negative event of a slop rewrite into drama? It's petty and immature.

[dminik]

Also notice how I didn't have to bring up Andrew soiling his Pampers when he was a wee beginner.

[Mawr]

It's a good thing there's nothing of the sort in TFA then?

Quoting:

"He moved fast and tried a lot of different stuff, jumping head first into problems that he was not yet equipped to solve, leading to mediocre outcomes in terms of engineering, but learning a whole heck of a lot in the process. I see it as quite a healthy attitude, particularly for young people and students. This is the best way to level up and learn new things."

I don't know, maybe you just don't understand what he's saying here? Or rather, are applying some sort of a negative spin to what is a factual analysis of a valid approach to doing something?

[dminik]

My issue with the paragraph is that it doesn't really connect into anything meaningful. It's just saying that Jarred was a beginner.

The only connection it has is as a segue into calling Jarred a terrible manager here:

> It was at this point - when he suddenly became a manager - that this "beginner energy" started to hit differently for me.

Note how "beginner energy" is considered good in the first paragraph, but suddenly terrible when applied to a different thing here. Terrible work culture aside, and the fact that it seemingly worked out for those who joined aside, Jarred would obviously have beginner energy in management as well considering he's not done it before. Why is it suddenly bad here?

Honest question, is there any record of Andrew actually saying Jarred had "beginner energy," or was this invented for the post as well?

[dpatterbee]

If you view that first sentence as a personal attack I'm not really sure what response I can make here. As a sentence it almost says nothing at all. 'When Jarrad started he gave off a real "starting" vibe'.

Also I learned nothing about Jarred's life from this post, so I don't understand that point. That he lives or lived in San Francisco I guess, and didn't go to university?

[dminik]

Well, first off, it's literally the first sentence of a post which is ~62% about Jared, ~26% about the rewrite itself and 10% closing thoughts. It also sets up Jared as a beginner who apparently never learned.

Again, this post never needed to say anything about Jared. It looks weird to pull him in in literally the first sentence. It really shows what you're actually writing about.

[dpatterbee]

This blog post about Jarred never needed to say anything about Jarred? What on Earth does that mean? It is a response to a blog post written by Jarred, about actions taken by Jarred, and yet you think Jarred shouldn't have been mentioned.

[dminik]

It's not really titled "My Thoughts on the scumbag Jarred Sumner" though, is it? Nor does Jarred's post even mention Andrew by name.

Should Jarred's post have mentioned how Andrew kept bikeshedding Bun code style and how he always felt superior about others?