[LRUG] Suggestion

[Jakub Prudzienica]

Chill out people and use those in your mock ups:

http://placepuppy.it/

http://placekitten.com/

-- 
Jakub 


> On 12 Feb 2014, at 22:32, Luke Morton <lukemorton.dev at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> I think most people would agree it doesn't matter whether you are or aren't a developer. Therefore the question probably wasn't needed.
> 
> 
>> On 12 February 2014 22:28, Aanand Prasad <aanand.prasad at gmail.com> wrote:
>> To be clear, I was drawing an analogy to the "are you a Ruby developer?" question, not the proposed "everyone here is a developer" assumption.
>> 
>> I'm not advocating blanket assumptions - I'm advocating being careful around asking questions which might have othering effects.
>> 
>> 
>>> On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 1:34 PM, Warren Guy <warren at guy.net.au> wrote:
>>> Aanand Prasad wrote: 
>>> >> I will admit that I did ask this question at least a couple of times, and I am truly sorry if that bothered or offended anyone. 
>>> ... 
>>> > The effect, in aggregate, of having this conversation again and again is harmful far beyond the innocent intentions of any one person asking it: the othering of those who don't fit the norm. The question behind the question, as Hari Kondabolu puts it: "Hey. Why aren't you white?"[1] 
>>> ... 
>>> > This is a microaggression[2], undoubtedly, and it should be treated as one: largely unintentional, perhaps even well-intentioned, but nonetheless harmful and something we should be taking direct action to avoid. Because we *want* more people in our social spaces who don't fit the norm. 
>>> > 
>>> > It takes a bit of extra effort to watch that we're not alienating people, but it's worth it. 
>>> 
>>> I'm aware of this phenomenon and its harm, but to be honest I can't 
>>> quite get my head around how the analogy fits here. 
>>> 
>>> To me, making an assumption that everyone at an LRUG event is a Ruby 
>>> developer just like you seems far from inclusive. If Monday's meeting 
>>> was typical in this regard, there are all kinds of developer, 
>>> pseudo-developer, and non-developer folk at the meetings. The community 
>>> comprises all kinds: developers; hobbyists; beginners; entrepreneurs; 
>>> managers; and others who won't identify themselves as "developers".[1]I 
>>> can't imagine anyone being offended by someone inquiring what their 
>>> interest in Ruby is, at a Ruby meeting. 
>>> 
>>> While personally I would not be offended by someone assuming I was or 
>>> was not a Ruby developer, to suggest that we all assume that everyone 
>>> *is* a developer seems to seek only to exclude. Stephen's original post, 
>>> regardless of any intent or lack thereof,really gave me the impression 
>>> that non-developers do not belong, or are less welcome than "Ruby 
>>> developers", at LRUG events. I do not assume that Stephen's comment had 
>>> any malicious intent. I just thought it was worth making the point that 
>>> we're not all developers and that it is exclusionary to assume so. 
>>> 
>>> Warren 
>>> 
>>> [1] For clarity, I don't intend to exclude beginners, hobbyists, etc, 
>>> from also considering themselves Ruby developers. Some will, some won't. 
>>> I think it's a personal thing.
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Chat mailing list
>> Chat at lists.lrug.org
>> http://lists.lrug.org/listinfo.cgi/chat-lrug.org
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Chat mailing list
> Chat at lists.lrug.org
> http://lists.lrug.org/listinfo.cgi/chat-lrug.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.lrug.org/pipermail/chat-lrug.org/attachments/20140212/61a53906/attachment-0003.html>