Thread · 5 tweets · 11 Aug 2019

I think it may come across as inconsistent because there are really two levels of engagement here. As I said upthread, this is a papercut. There's a wealth of nuanced discussions that we can have around the specifics and I'm thankful for the engagement.

But there is also the problem that this is the thousandth papercut. It's OK to fuck up. But how many times is it OK to fuck up, with the same beneficiary, before it calls for more than a cough-ahem over a cup of tea?

We've talked about this before, in milder tones, but where's the change?

Sure enough, I'm cranky. That's hardly new! But given the option I'd rather be cranky about of bunch of other stuff tbh. If you want to also fix that incensing level too, we can talk about that too. I can be optimistic yet one more time.

What is your ethical process when you evaluate new features? Does it account for platform privilege? If not, might that be added? Note that sometimes that'll still mean doing it, but at least on purpose and ideally publicly acknowledged. Just one thought!