<commit_before>---
layout: post
title: My one-sided retrospective of Stack Overflow's pronoun affair
tags: community opinion
comments: yes
---

I got [a
comment](https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/345734/feedback-for-the-loop-march-2020/345755?noredirect=1#comment1158495_345755)
on an answer I left on Meta Stack Exchange:

> I think the problem was that a) The decision to demod Monica came
> from high up the chain of command and everyone below was scared of
> apologising on their behalf and b) The general feeling seems to be
> that they shouldn't need to really apologise to a bigot. Everything
> that came afterwards reflects that thinking, right up to the point
> that they were eventually forced to recant by legal means. There's
> no good evidence that any of the underlying thinking has
> changed. They're sorry it caused a fuss, not sorry they did
> it.&mdash;[Richard](https://meta.stackexchange.com/users/262849/richard) 

Because of the nature of [Stack Overflow's agreement with Monica
Cellio](https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/340906/update-an-agreement-with-monica-cellio),
there is realistically no chance the company will respond to this
speculation. I wrote obliquely about a retrospective in a [Twitter
thread about
accountability](https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1230268701510733824.html). After
thinking about this for over a month, I believe it important to tell<commit_msg>Make the link to the comment more clear.<commit_after>---
layout: post
title: My one-sided retrospective of Stack Overflow's pronoun affair
tags: community opinion
comments: yes
---

Richard left [a
comment](https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/345734/feedback-for-the-loop-march-2020/345755?noredirect=1#comment1158495_345755)
on an answer I left on Meta Stack Exchange:

> I think the problem was that a) The decision to demod Monica came
> from high up the chain of command and everyone below was scared of
> apologising on their behalf and b) The general feeling seems to be
> that they shouldn't need to really apologise to a bigot. Everything
> that came afterwards reflects that thinking, right up to the point
> that they were eventually forced to recant by legal means. There's
> no good evidence that any of the underlying thinking has
> changed. They're sorry it caused a fuss, not sorry they did
> it. 

Because of the nature of [Stack Overflow's agreement with Monica
Cellio](https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/340906/update-an-agreement-with-monica-cellio),
there is realistically no chance the company will respond to this
speculation. I wrote obliquely about a retrospective in a [Twitter
thread about
accountability](https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1230268701510733824.html). After
thinking about this for over a month, I believe it important to tell
{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.06976744186046512, 'fraction_numerical': 0.04150268336314848, 'mean_word_length': 4.89873417721519, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 3, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 21, 'https://': 7, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
{'dir': 'git-commits-cleaned', 'id': '7537776', 'n_tokens_mistral': 867, 'n_tokens_neox': 750, 'n_words': 350}