Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Drupal Confessions – An Open Letter

drupalconfessions.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 341 posts

Re: Drupal Confessions – An Open Letter

#151

Post by dorfsmay »

lr4444lr wrote: post #87
humanrebar wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The board can ask you to leave at any time if you seem to be a liability... It's worth noting that many of the objections are about private information being misused. Eich was actually outed from a donor list that was leaked. There's a lot of parallels here if the concern is about "doxxing" activities. I also have a really hard time with the "but CEOs are different argument". So could being a Democrat in a red stat…

CEOs serve at will. Their job duties include being an emissary to the industry, and leading the company's reputation. I say what happened to Garfield was wrong, but agree that the Mozilla board made the right decision on Eich, who could not effectively carry out his general duties given the PR liability he became - not of his own making even. They didn't say he couldn't be a part of the org. as a lead software archit…

To me, the message was "Mozilla is about promoting trendy idea", rather than openness.

If we cannot support and debate "wrong" ideas, then we're not very open in my opinion.

Re: Drupal Confessions – An Open Letter

#152

Post by therpe1 »

tps5 wrote: post #121
Pxtl wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is where professionalism is important. Firmly separating your personal life and your professional life. That said, there's a huge gap between a religion a person is imparted with as a child, and philosophy they chose as an adult and have jumped into with both feet. Many people come from backgrounds with bigoted ideas like that, but they don't colour their daily lives with it because they're not actively married…

I don't think you get it. It doesn't matter what some guy posts on some message board (unless it's a threat, an incitement of violence, or something along those lines). It doesn't matter if he says he believes in "Gorean philosophy," whatever the hell that is. What matters are his actions. If he's treating women disrespectfully then, by all means, throw him out. But he's allowed to believe whatever the hell he wants,…

This is a distinction without difference. No meaningful line can be drawn between "belief" and "behavior." Somebody who holds hateful beliefs will act on those beliefs whether it's donating to a political candidate who wishes to provide government support to the hateful ideology or it's protesting the targets of that hate or it's just posting on a bulletin board and attempting to spread the hate to others.

Here's a much simpler and more radical idea: let each group decide, based upon their own values, what criteria will be applied to their members. Internet communities are not a public spaces that belong to all. They're not managed by the government. They're not even a "protected" space like private corporations. They're not even clubs whose membership confers significant socio-economic benefits. They are free, private associations in the purest sense of the word. Think of people gathering to have a chat at a bar or hobbyists getting together on the weekend to build matchbox race cars.

Given this, it's right and proper that the people of the Drupal Community don't want to hang out with some creep who hates women and have ejected him. It's their community, let them decide.

Re: Drupal Confessions – An Open Letter

#153

Post by Pxtl »

tps5 wrote: post #121
Pxtl wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is where professionalism is important. Firmly separating your personal life and your professional life. That said, there's a huge gap between a religion a person is imparted with as a child, and philosophy they chose as an adult and have jumped into with both feet. Many people come from backgrounds with bigoted ideas like that, but they don't colour their daily lives with it because they're not actively married…

I don't think you get it. It doesn't matter what some guy posts on some message board (unless it's a threat, an incitement of violence, or something along those lines). It doesn't matter if he says he believes in "Gorean philosophy," whatever the hell that is. What matters are his actions. If he's treating women disrespectfully then, by all means, throw him out. But he's allowed to believe whatever the hell he wants,…

I do get it. That's why I started from the important of professionalism, of separating the professional from the personal. But I'm also pointing out the other side: that maybe, just maybe, this kind of thing crosses the line. If it was just his beliefs we wouldn't know about them in the first place. But obviously, we know about them, which means it's not just his beliefs it's his statements.

If I went around on some other private forum and said "tps5 is sub-human and should be subservient to me" you'd have reason to say "I will not work with Pxtl and I'm disappointed that this project is working with him, his behavior is seriously not okay".

If I went around on some other private forum and said "all people who share attribute X with tps5 are sub-human and should be subservient to me" is that more or less okay?

Re: Drupal Confessions – An Open Letter

#154

Post by yakshaving_jgt »

Pxtl wrote: post #129
maxlybbert wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That said, there's a huge gap between a religion a person is imparted with as a child, and philosophy they chose as an adult and have jumped into with both feet. Searching out which people have chosen a philosophy as an adult is how witch hunts start and are justified. I've heard complaints about McCarthyism and the Red Scare over the years, and I thought the moral was "witch hunts are bad." However, it looks clear…

Leftist beliefs aren't "half the population is my lesser ". Seriously, would you make excuses like this for a pro-ISIS muslim? A white nationalist? A violent anarchist? An antisemitic holocaust denier? Believing that one person is less human than the other by the attributes of their birth is not a philosophical discussion like capitalism vs communism. If witches are actually doing damage , then by all means hunt them…

> Leftist beliefs aren't "half the population is my lesser".

Yes they are. Opposing views (and the people who hold them) are seen as morally inferior. Furthermore, people who hold leftist beliefs defend other people who hold views such as “women are inferior”, or “homosexuality should be punishable by death”, etc.

And I say this is a liberal, left-leaning, pro-multiculturalism individual.

My point is perhaps not entirely relevant to this Drupal guy though.

Re: Drupal Confessions – An Open Letter

#155

Post by dorfsmay »

nebabyte wrote: post #91
ekianjo wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

another victim of the proponents of Liberty And Freedom. Who basically dont accept opinions different than theirs.

Seems reasonable. The Catholic Church doesn't allow high-ranking members to be atheists, and look, the Old World even gave them their own state.

The Catholic church never pretended to be open-minded!

Re: Drupal Confessions – An Open Letter

#156

Post by stillhere »

oneeyedpigeon wrote: post #82
ekianjo wrote: post #33

sorry but how does that work to be for tolerance and anti discrimination in the first place ? anti discrimination means you Do NOT tolerate people who discriminate, so you cant be tolerant at the same time. I always see this kind of contradictions in principles.

Totally agree. I'm fed up of the argument that goes "if you preach tolerance, you must be tolerant of intolerance", for my own understanding of tolerance. Yes, you shouldn't commit a violent act against someone because they are intolerant. No, you shouldn't have to accept their intolerance unreservedly. I also have an issue with the part of the statement that reads along the lines of "we are against discrimination ba…

Who decides what is intolerant? Free speech becomes more limited over time as the definition changes to anything which hurts someones feelings for example. Or, in this case, ascribes to BDSM and fantasy lifestyle.

You are the thought police.

Re: Drupal Confessions – An Open Letter

#157

Post by Turing_Machine »

enord wrote: post #55
watwut wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Plenty of open source communities are political beyond user rights. If you believe NSA should be able to watch everybody all the time, Tor people will kick you out. ------------ Gor is not just a flavor of porn, it is full philosophy of gender relationships. E.g. it does not just says "this gets me off", it says "this is nature of men/women, modern society is suppressing that nature and that is wrong". Some are in it…

>Gor is not just a flavor of porn, it is full philosophy of gender relationships. E.g. it does not just says "this gets me off", it says "this is nature of men/women, modern society is suppressing that nature and that is wrong". Some are in it for sex, but quite clearly others are in it because they believe in philosophy and attempt to live by it as much as possible/legal. It's a series of fantasy f*#%ing novels, ofc…

"It's a series of fantasy f#%ing novels, of course it's role-play."

It seems so to me as well. There probably are people who take it a bit too far, just as there are in most fan groups (e.g., people who get cosmetic surgery to look like anime characters, etc.), but I don't recall hearing of any rash of abuse cases involving Goreans (apologies if that's not the right term).

I'm wondering just how far this goes. I have a friend who participates in Civil War reenactments (again, apologies if I don't get the terminology right). He plays a Confederate, and spends a considerable amount of time and money getting his gear and persona as close to perfect as he possibly can. That doesn't mean he really believes in slavery, or even that the South should have won the Civil War. Quite the contrary -- I'm 100% sure that he doesn't believe those things. This is just something he does for fun.

Re: Drupal Confessions – An Open Letter

#158

Post by na85 »

jacquesm wrote: post #138
manarth wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Marvel Comics recently fired an illustrator for hiding Islamist, anti-Semitic and anti-Christian references in his art. It wasn't exactly his art in which the references were hidden - it was Marvel's art . He hid the references in comic panels, commissioned by Marvel and designed specifically for publication in a Marvel comic.

That's a practice that is as old as Michelangelo.

No comparison can be made between Marvel Comics, and Michelangelo.

Re: Drupal Confessions – An Open Letter

#159

Post by draw_down »

From the outside it's been hard to judge who's wrong or right here, the whole thing stinks to high heaven.

All I know is I wouldn't want to get involved with a similar big project these days. I guess you could just use a fake name, but that probably wouldn't hold up if you wanted to have any sort of leadership role.

Re: Drupal Confessions – An Open Letter

#160

Post by Turing_Machine »

coldpie wrote: post #120
humanrebar wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The donor list was not public. Some people believe private political behavior should stay private, just like voting. Saying "this is too important for privacy to apply" affects more issues than just politics advocacy. In this situation, people apparently are applying the template: "When you X, it's no longer personal anymore".

Are you sure it wasn't public? Those kinds of donation rolls often are. In either case, I do think it is reasonable to reject a CEO who is actively attempting to harm their own employees through government enforcement of personal religious beliefs. Especially for an altruistic company like Mozilla.

Given that Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton were also opposed to gay marriage at that time, would you agree that that they should also have been disqualified?

If not, why not?

Post reply on HN