Learned Fortran on an old TI-99; forgot Fortran; learned to draw, paint, sculpt, and play violin; learned how to merge code and art, turned it into my UX/Front-end dev Frankenthing.
Personally, I like reading H. P. Lovecraft's stories, but his racist leanings were horrible, to say the least. There is a bit of wiggle room, though, considering - his racism was comical viewed through the lens of the mythos he created, he lived his whole life fearing that he was truly his father's son (in other words, clinically insane), and he frequently remarked that anyone who believed the horrors he wrote about (metaphorically, hatred of others based on cultural differences) were real were clearly lunatics.
But Sonmez is a whole different case. Instead of questioning his own hate and vitriol, he doubled down on it. This seems like the absolute wrong way to go when you write books about soft skills. Surely, if you write about soft skills, you should demonstrate that you have soft skills yourself, right? It'd be like me writing a book about the greatest football strategies ever, even though I can't stand football.
Granted, I don't like SJWs any more than he does (SJAs are more my style), but his full support of the ideology of alpha male identitarians is inexcusable. Personally, I'd rather learn about soft skills from someone who actually has soft skills.
To clarify for those who don't know what I mean by SJAs being more my style, the general definitions I go by are:
SJW/Social Justice Warrior - hates all things white, male, able, cis, straight, 'normie', and who are not sufficiently poverty-stricken. They have often taken less than one year of gender studies or racial studies, have not yet lived without their parents' support, are wealthy, and wish for someone who can check all the minority blocks to take all power and crush all 'normies' under their iron fist. -Purity culture for the left
SQW/Status Quo Warrior - hates all non-whites, women, 'the gays', 'lady boys', drag queens, 'dirty poors', no matter how poor they are themselves, non-Christians, and anyone who generally isn't them. They often pine for 'the good ol' days' when blacks were slaves, women were to be given to men by their fathers for political and financial gain, and wealthy, god-fearing men were in charge. -Purity culture for the right
SJA/Social Justice Activist - Someone who works to make the world a better place for everyone, regardless of skin color, sex, sexual persuasion, gender, disability, financial ability, or any other issue that divides us socially and politically. -Equality and opportunity for all, aspirations of 'purity' for none.
I understand my definitions for these terms may differ from yours (and likely Sonmez, at least on the SJA bit), but it's less about the term and more about the attitude in my book. No offense to those who still call themselves SJWs when SJA might be a better fit - again, it's about what you do and not which 3 letters you go by.
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
I'd say it's all situational.
Personally, I like reading H. P. Lovecraft's stories, but his racist leanings were horrible, to say the least. There is a bit of wiggle room, though, considering - his racism was comical viewed through the lens of the mythos he created, he lived his whole life fearing that he was truly his father's son (in other words, clinically insane), and he frequently remarked that anyone who believed the horrors he wrote about (metaphorically, hatred of others based on cultural differences) were real were clearly lunatics.
But Sonmez is a whole different case. Instead of questioning his own hate and vitriol, he doubled down on it. This seems like the absolute wrong way to go when you write books about soft skills. Surely, if you write about soft skills, you should demonstrate that you have soft skills yourself, right? It'd be like me writing a book about the greatest football strategies ever, even though I can't stand football.
Granted, I don't like SJWs any more than he does (SJAs are more my style), but his full support of the ideology of alpha male identitarians is inexcusable. Personally, I'd rather learn about soft skills from someone who actually has soft skills.
To clarify for those who don't know what I mean by SJAs being more my style, the general definitions I go by are:
I understand my definitions for these terms may differ from yours (and likely Sonmez, at least on the SJA bit), but it's less about the term and more about the attitude in my book. No offense to those who still call themselves SJWs when SJA might be a better fit - again, it's about what you do and not which 3 letters you go by.