I think the author’s idea of painting it as a dark third place is way off base (pretty much every point seems off base). Is reading a book a dark third place because you didn’t write the book?
Third places are where you might have a conversation about the fun puzzle you solved, they aren’t the puzzle.
Well they state elsewhere in the post, rightly or wrongly, that they don’t think these are fun puzzles but instead promote a problematic junior dev ego thing. Beyond that the main thrust of their reasoning seems to be the whole developer “culture” of “needing” to do work outside of work. If you come to oppose this and don’t find the problems/solutions edifying, then “fun puzzle” is no longer an apt description and I think it makes a lot of sense to see the whole thing as relatively “dark” compared to what a nice or fulfilling “third place” can be.
The idea that these puzzles which people are obviously enjoying are contributing to a poor culture among developers is not supported by his arguments. The author should simply make their case about the poor culture instead of shoe horning in a poor example of it backed with contrived reasons.
If you don’t like the puzzles, ignore them. Same as any leisure activity, don’t force it. There’s nothing wrong with not participating. The author’s idea that there is something wrong with not participating is his problem.
Well, if you don’t like their reasoning or rejection of AoC … you can ignore it too. I think you’re taking this a bit too seriously, it was never intended as a grand thesis on dev culture. It is a statement of a relatively specific sentiment that some agree or resonate with and some don’t. You’re looking for logic when there’s just opinion.
Yeah but there’s a difference between saying, I don’t like JavaScript and here’s why” and “if you’re a JavaScript dev you are the worst kind of person”.
I think the author’s idea of painting it as a dark third place is way off base (pretty much every point seems off base). Is reading a book a dark third place because you didn’t write the book?
Third places are where you might have a conversation about the fun puzzle you solved, they aren’t the puzzle.
Well they state elsewhere in the post, rightly or wrongly, that they don’t think these are fun puzzles but instead promote a problematic junior dev ego thing. Beyond that the main thrust of their reasoning seems to be the whole developer “culture” of “needing” to do work outside of work. If you come to oppose this and don’t find the problems/solutions edifying, then “fun puzzle” is no longer an apt description and I think it makes a lot of sense to see the whole thing as relatively “dark” compared to what a nice or fulfilling “third place” can be.
It’s not even a third place.
The idea that these puzzles which people are obviously enjoying are contributing to a poor culture among developers is not supported by his arguments. The author should simply make their case about the poor culture instead of shoe horning in a poor example of it backed with contrived reasons.
If you don’t like the puzzles, ignore them. Same as any leisure activity, don’t force it. There’s nothing wrong with not participating. The author’s idea that there is something wrong with not participating is his problem.
Well, if you don’t like their reasoning or rejection of AoC … you can ignore it too. I think you’re taking this a bit too seriously, it was never intended as a grand thesis on dev culture. It is a statement of a relatively specific sentiment that some agree or resonate with and some don’t. You’re looking for logic when there’s just opinion.
On the contrary, my point is that his proclamations shouldn’t be taken seriously at all.
Yeah but there’s a difference between saying, I don’t like JavaScript and here’s why” and “if you’re a JavaScript dev you are the worst kind of person”.